Cyclic Permutations: Degrees and Combinatorial Types

Abstract: This note will give an enumeration of $n$-cycles in the symmetric group ${\mathcal S}_n$ by their degree (also known as their cyclic descent number) and studies similar counting problems for the conjugacy classes of $n$-cycles under the action of the rotation subgroup of ${\mathcal S}_n$. This is achieved by relating such cycles to periodic orbits of an associated dynamical system acting on the circle. We also compute the mean and variance of the degree of a random $n$-cycle and show that its distribution is asymptotically normal as $n \to \infty$.

\section{Introduction}

The classical Eulerian numbers describe the distribution of descent number in the full symmetric group ${\mathscr S}_n$ and have been studied extensively for more than a century (see for example \cite{P2} and \cite{St}). Understanding the distribution of descent number in a given conjugacy class of ${\mathscr S}_n$ is a more subtle problem that was first tackled in the 1990's by Gessel and Reutenauer \cite{GR}, by Diaconis, McGrath, and Pitman \cite{DMP}, and by Fulman \cite{F1}.  \vspace{6pt}

This note will consider a variant of the descent number of a permutation $\nu \in {\mathscr S}_n$, which we call its {\it degree}, defined by
$$
\deg(\nu) = \# \big\{ i : \nu(i) > \nu(i+1) \big\},
$$
where the integer $i$ is taken modulo $n$. Our terminology is justified by a simple topological interpretation of this quantity, but it turns out that what we call degree in this paper has already been studied in the combinatorics literature under the name {\it cyclic descent number} (see for example \cite{C}, \cite{F2}, \cite{P1}, and \cite{DPS}). The degree has the advantage of being invariant under the left and right actions of the rotation subgroup of ${\mathscr S}_n$ generated by the cycle $(1 \, 2 \, \cdots \, n)$, and naturally occurs in the study of the combinatorial patterns of periodic orbits of covering maps of the circle (see \cite{M} and \cite{PZ}). Motivated by this connection, we will investigate the distribution of degree in the conjugacy class ${\mathscr C}_n$ of all $n$-cycles in ${\mathscr S}_n$. Let $N_{n,d}$ denote the number of $\nu \in {\mathscr C}_n$ with $\deg(\nu)=d$. In \S \ref{sec:des} we prove

\begin{theorem}\label{YEK}
For every $d \geq 1$,
$$
N_{n,d} = \sum_{k=1}^d (-1)^{d-k} \binom{n}{d-k} \Delta_n(k),
$$
where
$$
\Delta_n(k) = \sum_{r|n} \mu \Big( \frac{n}{r} \Big) \Big(\sum_{j=0}^{r-1} k^j \Big)
$$
and $\mu$ is the M\"{o}bius function.
\end{theorem}

This is the analog of the alternating sum formula for Eulerian numbers, and the similar formulas in \cite{DMP} and \cite{F1} for permutations with a given cycle structure and descent number. Our proof makes essential use of a count for the number of period $n$ orbits of the linear endomorphism $\mathbf{m}_k(x)=kx \ (\operatorname{mod} {\mathbb Z})$ of the circle ${\mathbb R}/{\mathbb Z}$ that realize the combinatorics of degree $d$ elements in ${\mathscr C}_n$, developed by C.~L.~Petersen and the author \cite{PZ}. The $\Delta_n(k)$ for $k \geq 2$ can be interpreted as the number of period $n$ points of $\mathbf{m}_k$ up to rotation by a \mbox{$(k-1)$-st} root of unity (see \S \ref{keek}, \S \ref{CNQD} and \S \ref{compp}). \vspace{6pt}

It follows immediately from \thmref{YEK} that the generating function $G_n(x)= \sum_{d=1}^{n-2} N_{n,d} \, x^d$ has the power series expansion
$$
G_n(x)=(1-x)^n \sum_{i \geq 1} \Delta_n(i) \, x^i.
$$
This result should be viewed as the analog of Carlitz's identity for Eulerian numbers (compare \S \ref{CNQD} and \S \ref{compp}). \vspace{6pt}

It is well known that the descent number of a randomly chosen permutation in ${\mathscr S}_n$ has mean $(n-1)/2$ and variance $(n+1)/12$ (see for example \cite{Pi}). In \S \ref{sec:stat} we prove

\begin{theorem}\label{DO}
The degree of a randomly chosen cycle in ${\mathscr C}_n$ (with respect to the uniform measure) has mean
$$
\frac{n}{2}-\frac{1}{n-1} \qquad \text{if} \ n \geq 3,
$$
and variance
$$
\frac{n}{12}+\frac{n}{(n-1)^2(n-2)} \qquad \text{if} \ n \geq 5.
$$
\end{theorem}

The idea of the proof, inspired by the method of Fulman in \cite{F1}, is to express the generating functions $G_n$ in terms of the generating functions of the Eulerian numbers (the so-called Eulerian polynomials) for which the mean and variance are already known (see \S \ref{asnorm}). \vspace{6pt}

The following central limit theorem for the degree is also proved in \S \ref{sec:stat}:

\begin{theorem}\label{SE}
When normalized by its mean and variance, the distribution of $\deg(\nu)$ for $\nu \in {\mathscr C}_n$ converges to the standard normal distribution as $n \to \infty$.
\end{theorem}

Compare \figref{normal}. \vspace{6pt}

\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\begin{overpic}[width=\textwidth]{norm.pdf}
\end{overpic}
\caption{\sl Illustration of \thmref{SE}. Top: The histogram of the distribution of degree among $n$-cycles, scaled horizontally to $n-2$, for $10 \leq n \leq 70$. The rapid convergence to a bell-shaped density is evident. Bottom: The distribution of degree among $200$-cycles, normalized by its mean and variance (only 41 out of 198 points are visible in the given window). The curve in blue is the standard normal distribution.}
\label{normal}
\end{figure}

The central limit theorem for the distribution of descent number over ${\mathscr S}_n$ or a given conjugacy class has been known (see for example the papers of Bender \cite{B} or Harper \cite{H} for the former, and the recent work of Kim and Lee \cite{KL1} for the latter). Our proof follows the strategy of \cite{FKL} and is based on the idea of reducing convergence in distribution to pointwise convergence of the moment generating functions over some non-empty open interval, as utilized in \cite{KL2} (see \S \ref{asnorm}). \vspace{6pt}

Motivated by applications in dynamics, we also study the conjugacy classes of ${\mathscr C}_n$ under the action of the rotation subgroup of ${\mathscr S}_n$. Each such class is called a {\it combinatorial type} in ${\mathscr C}_n$. In \S \ref{sec:so} we count the number of $n$-cycles of a given symmetry order and use it to derive a (known) formula for the number of distinct combinatorial types in ${\mathscr C}_n$ (compare Theorems \ref{NQR} and \ref{NQ}). This section is elementary and rather independent of the rest of the paper, except for \S \ref{ttnn} where we discuss the problem of counting the number of distinct combinatorial types of a given degree. \vspace{6pt}

A partial motivation for writing the present note was the belief that using dynamical systems could give a different and interesting perspective on the problem of enumeration of $n$-cycles by their degree. After a preliminary version of this paper appeared on arXiv.org, J. Fulman informed me that an alternative proof of \thmref{YEK} can be given using results in his paper [F2]. More generally, he is able to derive similar enumeration results in arbitrary conjugacy classes in ${\mathscr S}_n$. However, his methods are not elementary or combinatorial, as they rely on representation theory of the Whitehouse module. An interesting open problem is to develop a purely combinatorial approach to our degree counts for $n$-cycles or other conjugacy classes in ${\mathscr S}_n$. \vspace{6pt}

\noindent
{\it Acknowledgments.} I'm grateful to J. Fulman for his support and interest in this work, and for sharing his insights on the problems discussed here. I also thank anonymous referees for several helpful comments, which in particular brought my attention to some of the previous work on cyclic descents.

\section{Preliminaries} \label{sec:pre}

Fix an integer $n \geq 2$. We denote by ${\mathscr S}_n$ the group of all permutations of $\{ 1,\ldots, n \}$ and by ${\mathscr C}_n$ the collection of all $n$-cycles in ${\mathscr S}_n$. Following the tradition of group theory, we represent $\nu \in {\mathscr C}_n$ by the symbol
$$
( 1 \ \nu(1) \ \nu^2(1) \ \cdots \ \nu^{n-1}(1) ).
$$
The {\it \bfseries rotation group} ${\mathscr R}_n$ is the cyclic subgroup of ${\mathscr S}_n$ generated by the $n$-cycle
$$
\rho := (1 \, 2 \, \cdots \, n).
$$
Elements of ${\mathscr R}_n \cap {\mathscr C}_n$ are called {\it \bfseries rotation cycles}. Thus, $\nu \in {\mathscr C}_n$ is a rotation cycle if and only if $\nu = \rho^m$ for some integer $1 \leq m < n$ with $\gcd(m,n)=1$. The reduced fraction $m/n$ is called the {\it \bfseries rotation number} of $\rho^m$. \vspace{6pt}

The rotation group ${\mathscr R}_n$ acts on ${\mathscr C}_n$ by conjugation. We refer to each orbit of this action as a {\it \bfseries combinatorial type} in ${\mathscr C}_n$. The combinatorial type of an $n$-cycle $\nu$ is denoted by $[\nu]$. It is easy to see that $\nu$ is a rotation cycle if and only if $[\nu]$ consists of $\nu$ only. In fact, if $\rho \nu \rho^{-1} = \nu$, then $\nu=\rho^m$ where $m=\nu(n)$.

\subsection{The symmetry order}

The combinatorial type of $\nu \in {\mathscr C}_n$ can be described explicitly as follows. Let
$$
G_\nu := \big\{ \rho^j : \rho^j \nu \rho^{-j}=\nu \big\}
$$
be the stabilizer group of $\nu$ under the action of ${\mathscr R}_n$. We call the order of $G_\nu$ the {\it \bfseries symmetry order} of $\nu$ and denote it by $\operatorname{sym}(\nu)$. If $r:=n/\operatorname{sym}(\nu)$, it follows that $G_\nu$ is generated by the power $\rho^r$ and the combinatorial type of $\nu$ is the $r$-element set
$$
[\nu]= \big\{ \nu, \rho \nu \rho^{-1}, \ldots, \rho^{r-1} \nu \rho^{-(r-1)} \big\}.
$$
Since $\operatorname{sym}(\rho \nu \rho^{-1})=\operatorname{sym}(\nu)$, we can define the symmetry order of a combinatorial type unambiguously as that of any cycle representing it:
$$
\operatorname{sym}([\nu]):=\operatorname{sym}(\nu).
$$
Evidently there are no $2$- or $3$-cycles of symmetry order $1$, and there is no $4$-cycle of symmetry order $2$. By contrast, it is not hard to see that for every $n \geq 5$ and every divisor $s$ of $n$ there is a $\nu \in {\mathscr C}_n$ with $\operatorname{sym}(\nu)=s$. \vspace{6pt}

Of the $(n-1)!$ elements of ${\mathscr C}_n$, precisely $\varphi(n)$ are rotation cycles. Here $\varphi$ is Euler's totient function defined by
$$
\varphi(n) := \# \, \{ m \in {\mathbb Z}: 1 \leq m \leq n \ \text{and} \ \gcd(m,n)=1 \}.
$$
If $\nu_1, \ldots, \nu_T$ are representatives of the distinct combinatorial types in ${\mathscr C}_n$, then
$$
(n-1)! = \sum_{\nu_i \in {\mathscr R}_n } \# [ \nu_i] + \sum_{\nu_i \notin {\mathscr R}_n } \# [ \nu_i] = \varphi(n)+ \sum_{\nu_i \notin {\mathscr R}_n } \# [ \nu_i].
$$
When $n$ is a prime number, we have $\varphi(n)=n-1$ and each $\# [\nu_i]$ in the far right sum is $n$. In this case the number of distinct combinatorial types in ${\mathscr C}_n$ is given by
\begin{equation}\label{hayoola}
T = (n-1) + \frac{(n-1)!-(n-1)}{n} = \frac{(n-1)!+(n-1)^2}{n}.
\end{equation}
Observe that $T$ being an integer gives a simple proof of Wilson's theorem according to which $(n-1)! = -1 \ (\operatorname{mod} n)$ whenever $n$ is prime.

\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\begin{overpic}[width=\textwidth]{bm4.pdf}
\put (56,31) {$+$ four rotated copies of each}
\put (56,10) {$+$ four rotated copies of each}
\put (4,10) {${\mathscr C}_{5,3}^1$}
\put (4,31) {${\mathscr C}_{5,2}^1$}
\put (4,52) {${\mathscr C}_{5,1}^5$}
\put (21.5,52) {\footnotesize{$\rho$}}
\put (43.5,52) {\footnotesize{$\rho^2$}}
\put (65.5,52) {\footnotesize{$\rho^3$}}
\put (88,52) {\footnotesize{$\rho^4$}}
\put (21,33) {\footnotesize{$\pi$}}
\put (42,33) {\footnotesize{$\pi^{-1}$}}
\put (24,11) {\footnotesize{$\nu$}}
\put (46,11) {\footnotesize{$\nu^{-1}$}}
\end{overpic}
\caption{\sl The decomposition of ${\mathscr C}_5$ into subsets ${\mathscr C}_{5,d}^s$ of cycles with degree $d$ and symmetry order $s$, where the only admissible pairs are $(d,s)=(1,5), (2,1), (3,1)$. See Examples \ref{cyc5} and \ref{ajab}.}
\label{c5}
\end{figure}

\begin{example}\label{cyc5}
The $4!=24$ cycles in ${\mathscr C}_5$ fall into $(4!+4^2)/5=8$ distinct combinatorial types. The $4$ rotation cycles
\begin{align*}
\rho & = (1 \, 2 \, 3 \, 4 \, 5) & \rho^2 & = (1 \, 3 \, 5 \, 2 \, 4) \\
\rho^3 & = (1 \, 4 \, 2 \, 5 \, 3) & \rho^4 & = (1 \, 5 \, 4 \, 3 \, 2)
\end{align*}
(of rotation numbers $1/5, 2/5, 3/5, 4/5$) form $4$ distinct combinatorial types. The remaining $20$ cycles have symmetry order $1$, so they fall into $4$ combinatorial types each containing $5$ elements. These types are represented by
\begin{align*}
\pi & = (1 \, 2 \, 3 \, 5 \, 4) & \pi^{-1} & =(1 \, 4 \, 5 \, 3 \, 2) \\
\nu & =(1 \, 2 \, 4 \, 5 \, 3) &  \nu^{-1} & =(1 \, 3 \, 5 \, 4 \, 2).
\end{align*}
Compare \figref{c5}.
\end{example}

\subsection{Descent number vs. degree}\label{DNUM}

A permutation $\nu \in {\mathscr S}_n$ has a {\it \bfseries descent} at $i \in \{ 1, \ldots, n-1 \}$ if $\nu(i)>\nu(i+1)$. The total number of such $i$ is called the {\it \bfseries descent number} of $\nu$:
$$
\operatorname{des}(\nu) := \# \big\{ 1 \leq i \leq n-1  : \nu(i) > \nu(i+1) \big\}
$$
Note that $0 \leq \operatorname{des}(\nu) \leq n-1$. The descent number is a basic tool in enumerative combinatorics (see for example \cite{St}). \vspace{6pt}

In this paper we will be working with a rotationally invariant version of the descent number which we call {\it \bfseries degree}.\footnote{As noted in the introduction, our degree is synonymous to what combinatorists have called ``cyclic descent number'' in recent years. Somewhat unfortunately, this same invariant is referred to as ``descent number'' in \cite{PZ}.} It simply amounts to counting $i=n$ as a descent if $\nu(n)>\nu(1)$:
$$
\deg(\nu) := \begin{cases} \operatorname{des}(\nu) & \quad \text{if} \ \nu(n)<\nu(1) \\ \operatorname{des}(\nu)+1 & \quad \text{if} \ \nu(n)>\nu(1). \end{cases}
$$
The terminology comes from the following topological characterization (see \cite{M} and \cite{PZ}): Take any set $\{ x_1, \ldots, x_n \}$ of distinct points on the circle in positive cyclic order. Then $\deg(\nu)$ is the minimum degree of a continuous covering map $f: {\mathbb R}/{\mathbb Z} \to {\mathbb R}/{\mathbb Z}$ which acts on this set as the permutation $\nu$ in the sense that $f(x_i)=x_{\nu(i)}$ for all $i$. A simple model which realizes this minimum degree is the covering map that sends each counter-clockwise arc $[x_i,x_{i+1}]$ affinely onto $[x_{\nu(i)},x_{\nu(i+1)}]$. \vspace{6pt}

\begin{example}\label{ajab}
The cycle $\nu=(1 \, 2 \, 4 \, 5 \, 3) \in {\mathscr C}_5$ has descents at $i=2$, $i=4$ and $i=5$, so $\deg(\nu)=3$. The eight representative cycles in ${\mathscr C}_5$ described in \exref{cyc5} have the following degrees:
\begin{align*}
& \deg(\rho)=\deg(\rho^2)=\deg(\rho^3)=\deg(\rho^4)=1, \\
& \deg(\pi)=\deg(\pi^{-1})=2, \\
& \deg(\nu)=\deg(\nu^{-1})=3.
\end{align*}
The four cycles of degree $1$ have symmetry order $5$, and the remaining cycles have symmetry order $1$. Compare \figref{c5}.
\end{example}

The following statement summarizes the basic properties of degree for cycles:

\begin{theorem}\label{degp}
Let $\nu \in {\mathscr C}_n$ with $\operatorname{sym}(\nu)=s$ and $\deg(\nu)=d$. \vspace{6pt}
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(i)]
$1 \leq d \leq n-2$ if $n \geq 3$. \vspace{6pt}
\item[(ii)]
$d=1 \Longleftrightarrow s=n \Longleftrightarrow \nu \in {\mathscr R}_n$. \vspace{6pt}
\item[(iii)]
$s | \gcd(n,d-1)$. \vspace{6pt}
\item[(iv)]
$\deg(\rho \nu) = \deg(\nu \rho) = \deg(\rho \nu \rho^{-1})=d$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}

Apart from (iii) the other claims are rather straightforward; see \cite[Lemma 2.5, Theorem 2.8, and Theorem 6.4]{PZ}. I'm informed by a referee that parts (ii) and (iv) also appear in \cite[Lemma 1]{K}. \vspace{6pt}

Observe that by (iv), the degree of a combinatorial type is well-defined:
$$
\deg([\nu]):=\deg(\nu).
$$

\begin{example}\label{hasht}
Take $\nu \in {\mathscr C}_8$ with $\operatorname{sym}(\nu)=s$ and $\deg(\nu)=d$. By the above theorem $1 \leq d \leq 6$, with $d=1$ if and only if $s=8$. Moreover, $s$ is a common divisor of $8$ and $d-1$. It follows that the only admissible pairs $(d,s)$ are $(1,8), (2,1), (3,1), (3,2), (4,1), (5,1), (5,2), (5,4), (6,1)$.
\end{example}

\subsection{Decompositions of ${\mathscr C}_n$}

Fix $n \geq 3$ and consider the following cross sections of ${\mathscr C}_n$ by the symmetry order and degree:
\begin{align*}
{\mathscr C}_n^s & := \{ \nu \in {\mathscr C}_n : \operatorname{sym}(\nu)=s \} \\
{\mathscr C}_{n,d} & := \{ \nu \in {\mathscr C}_n : \deg(\nu)=d \} \\
{\mathscr C}_{n,d}^s & := {\mathscr C}_n^s \cap {\mathscr C}_{n,d}.
\end{align*}
Observe that in our notation the symmetry order always appears as a superscript and the degree as a subscript after $n$. By \thmref{degp},
$$
{\mathscr C}_n^n = {\mathscr C}_{n,1} = {\mathscr C}_{n,1}^n = {\mathscr C}_n \cap {\mathscr R}_n
$$
and we have the decompositions
\begin{align*}
{\mathscr C}_n & = \bigcup_{s|n} {\mathscr C}_n^s = \bigcup_{d=1}^{n-2} {\mathscr C}_{n,d} & & \\
{\mathscr C}_n^s & = \bigcup_{j=1}^{\lfloor (n-3)/s \rfloor} {\mathscr C}_{n,js+1}^s & & \text{if} \ s|n, \ s<n \\
{\mathscr C}_{n,d} & = \bigcup_{s|\gcd(n,d-1)} {\mathscr C}_{n,d}^s & & \text{if} \ 2 \leq d \leq n-2.
\end{align*}
Hence the cardinalities
\begin{align*}
N_n^s & := \# \, {\mathscr C}_n^s \\
N_{n,d} & := \# \, {\mathscr C}_{n,d} \\
N_{n,d}^s & := \# \, {\mathscr C}_{n,d}^s
\end{align*}
satisfy the following relations:
\begin{align}
N_n^n & = N_{n,1} = N_{n,1}^n = \varphi(n) & & \notag\\
(n-1)! & = \sum_{s|n} N_n^s = \sum_{d=1}^{n-2} N_{n,d} \notag \\
N_n^s & = \sum_{j=1}^{\lfloor (n-3)/s \rfloor} N_{n,js+1}^s & & \text{if} \ s|n, \ s<n \label{foo} \\
N_{n,d} & = \sum_{s|\gcd(n,d-1)} N_{n,d}^s & & \text{if} \ 2 \leq d \leq n-2. \label{loo}
\end{align}
Let us also consider the counts for the corresponding combinatorial types
\begin{align*}
T_n & := \# \, \{ [\nu]: \nu \in {\mathscr C}_n \} \\
T_n^s & := \# \, \{ [\nu]: \nu \in {\mathscr C}_n^s \} \\
T_{n,d} & := \# \, \{ [\nu]: \nu \in {\mathscr C}_{n,d} \} \\
T_{n,d}^s & := \# \, \{ [\nu]: \nu \in {\mathscr C}_{n,d}^s \}.
\end{align*}
Evidently
$$
T_{n,d}^s = \frac{s}{n} \ N_{n,d}^s \qquad \text{and} \qquad T_n^s = \frac{s}{n} \ N_n^s
$$
and we have the following relations:
\begin{align}
T_n^n & = T_{n,1} =T_{n,1}^n = \varphi(n) \notag\\
T_n & = \frac{1}{n} \sum_{s|n} s N_n^s \label{soo} \\
T_{n,d} & = \frac{1}{n} \sum_{s|\gcd(n,d-1)} s N_{n,d}^s \qquad \text{if} \ 2 \leq d \leq n-2.\notag
\end{align}
Of course knowing the joint distribution $N_{n,d}^s$ would allow us to count all the $N$'s and $T$'s. However, finding an closed formula for $N_{n,d}^s$ seems to be difficult (a sample computation can be found in \S \ref{ttnn}). In \S \ref{subsec:sym} we derive a formula for $N_n^s$ by a direct count which in turn leads to a formula for $T_n$ (see Theorems \ref{NQR} and \ref{NQ}). In \S \ref{CNQD} we find a formula for $N_{n,d}$ indirectly by relating cycles in ${\mathscr C}_{n,d}$ to periodic orbits of an associated dynamical system acting on the circle (see \thmref{jeeg}).

\section{The distribution of symmetry order} \label{sec:so}

\subsection{The numbers $N_n^s$}\label{subsec:sym}

We begin with the simplest of our counting problems, that is, finding a formula for $N_n^s$. We will make use of the M\"{o}bius inversion formula
\begin{equation}\label{MIF}
g(m) = \sum_{k|m} f(k) \quad \Longleftrightarrow \quad f(m)= \sum_{k|m} \mu(k) \, g\Big( \frac{m}{k} \Big)
\end{equation}
on a pair of arithmetical functions $f,g$. Here $\mu$ is the M\"{o}bius function uniquely determined by the conditions $\mu(1):=1$ and $\sum_{k|m} \mu(k)=0$ for $m>1$. Applying \eqref{MIF} to the relation
$$
m = \sum_{k|m} \varphi(k)
$$
gives the classical identity
\begin{equation}\label{muu}
\varphi(m) = \sum_{k|m} \frac{m}{k} \, \mu(k) = \sum_{k|m} k \mu\Big( \frac{m}{k} \Big).
\end{equation}

\begin{theorem}\label{NQR}
For every $n \geq 2$ and every divisor $s$ of $n$,
\begin{equation}\label{ninu}
N_n^s = \frac{1}{n} \sum_{j|\frac{n}{s}} \mu (j) \, \varphi(sj) \, (sj)^{\frac{n}{sj}} \Big( \frac{n}{sj} \Big)!
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}

When $s=n$ the formula reduces to $N_n^n= (1/n) \mu(1) \varphi(n) n = \varphi(n)$ which agrees with our earlier count.

\begin{proof}
Set $r:=n/s$. We have $\rho^r \nu \rho^{-r}=\nu$ if and only if $\operatorname{sym}(\nu)$ is a multiple of $s$ if and only if $\nu \in {\mathscr C}_n^{n/j}$ for some $j|r$. Denoting $\nu$ by $(\nu_1 \ \nu_2 \ \cdots \ \nu_n)$, this condition can be written as
$$
(\rho^r(\nu_1) \ \rho^r(\nu_2) \ \cdots \ \rho^r(\nu_n)) = (\nu_1 \ \nu_2 \ \cdots \ \nu_n),
$$
which holds if and only if there is an integer $m$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{yek}
\rho^r(\nu_i) = \nu_{\rho^m(i)} \qquad \text{for all} \ i.
\end{equation}
The rotations $\rho^r: i \mapsto i+r$ and $\rho^m: i \mapsto i+m \  (\operatorname{mod} n)$ have orders $n/\gcd(r,n)=n/r$ and $n/\gcd(m,n)$ respectively. By \eqref{yek}, these orders are equal, hence
$$
r=\gcd(m,n).
$$
Setting $t:=m/r$ gives $\gcd(t,s)=1$, so there are at most $\varphi(s)$ possibilities for $t$ and therefore for $m$. The action of the rotation $\rho^m$ partitions ${\mathbb Z}/ n{\mathbb Z}$ into $r$ disjoint orbits each consisting of $s$ elements and these $r$ orbits are represented by $1, \ldots, r$. In fact, if
$$
i+ \ell m = i'+ \ell' m \ (\operatorname{mod} n) \quad \text{for some} \ 1 \leq i,i' \leq r \ \text{and} \ 1 \leq \ell, \ell' \leq s,
$$
then $i-i' = m(\ell'-\ell) \ (\operatorname{mod} n)$ so $i = i' \ (\operatorname{mod} r)$ which gives $i=i'$. Moreover, $\ell m =  \ell' m \ (\operatorname{mod} n)$ so $\ell t = \ell' t \ (\operatorname{mod} s)$. Since $\gcd(t,s)=1$, this implies $\ell = \ell' \ (\operatorname{mod} s)$ which shows $\ell=\ell'$. \vspace{6pt}

Now \eqref{yek} shows that for each of the $\varphi(s)$ choices of $m$, the cycle $\nu$ is completely determined by the integers $\nu_1, \ldots, \nu_r$, and different choices of $m$ lead to different cycles. We may always assume $\nu_1=1$. This leaves $n-s$ choices for $\nu_2$ (corresponding to the elements of $\{ 1, \ldots, n \}$ that are not in the orbit of $\nu_1=1$ under $\rho^m$), $n-2s$ choices for $\nu_3$, $\ldots$ and $n-(r-1)s=s$ choices for $\nu_r$. Thus, the total number of choices for $\nu$ is
$$
\varphi(s) (n-s)(n-2s) \cdots s = \varphi(s)\, s^{r-1} \, (r-1)! = \frac{1}{n} \varphi(s) \, s^r \, r!
$$
This proves
$$
\sum_{j|r} N_n^{n/j} = \frac{1}{n} \varphi \Big( \frac{n}{r} \Big) \Big( \frac{n}{r} \Big)^r r!
$$
An application of the M\"{o}bius inversion formula \eqref{MIF} then gives
\begin{align*}
N_n^s = N_n^{n/r} & = \frac{1}{n} \sum_{j|r} \mu (j) \, \varphi\Big( \frac{nj}{r} \Big) \Big( \frac{nj}{r} \Big)^{\frac{r}{j}} \Big( \frac{r}{j} \Big)! \\
& =\frac{1}{n} \sum_{j|\frac{n}{s}} \mu (j) \, \varphi(sj) \, (sj)^{\frac{n}{sj}} \Big( \frac{n}{sj} \Big)! \qedhere
\end{align*}
\end{proof}

Table \ref{tab1} shows the values of $N_n^s$ for $2 \leq n \leq 15$. Notice that $N_2^1=N_3^1=N_4^2=0$ but all other values are positive. Moreover, as $n$ gets larger the distribution $N_n^s$ appears to be overwhelmingly concentrated at $s=1$. In fact, an elementary exercise gives the asymptotic estimate $N_n^1 \sim (n-1)!$ as $n \to \infty$ (compare \thmref{asymp} below for a similar analysis). This justifies the intuition that the chance of a randomly chosen $n$-cycle having any non-trivial rotational symmetry tends to zero as $n \to \infty$.

{\tiny
\begin{table}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{r|crrrrrrrrrrrrrrr}
\toprule
\diagbox{$n$}{$s$} & & $1$ & $2$ & $3$ & $4$ & $5$ & $6$ & $7$ & $8$ & $9$ & $10$ & $11$ & $12$ & $13$ & $14$ & $15$ \\
\midrule
$2$ & & $0$ & $1$ & & & & & & & & & & & & & \\
$3$ & & $0$ & $-$ & $2$ & & & & & & & & & & & & \\
$4$ & & $4$ & $0$ & $-$ & $2$ & & & & & & & & & & & \\
$5$ & & $20$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $4$ & & & & & & & & & & \\
$6$ & & $108$ & $6$ & $4$ & $-$ & $-$ & $2$ & & & & & & & & & \\
$7$ & & $714$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $6$ & & & & & & & & \\
$8$ & & $4992$ & $40$ & $-$ & $4$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $4$ & & & & & & &\\
$9$ & & $40284$ & $-$ & $30$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $6$ & & & & & &\\
$10$ & & $362480$ & $380$ & $-$ & $-$ & $16$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $4$ & & & & & \\
$11$ & & $3628790$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $10$ & & & & \\
$12$ & & $39912648$ & $3768$ & $312$ & $60$ & $-$ & $8$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ &  $-$ & $4$ & & & \\
$13$ & & $479001588$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $12$ & & \\
$14$ & & $6226974684$ & $46074$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $36$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $6$ & \\
$15$ & & $87178287120$ & $-$ & $3880$ & $-$ & $192$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $8$ \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\vspace*{2mm}
\caption{\sl The distributions $N_n^s$ for $2 \leq n \leq 15$.}
\label{tab1}
\end{table}
}

\subsection{The numbers $T_n$}

The count \eqref{ninu} led us to the following formula for the number of distinct combinatorial types of $n$-cycles. It turns out that this formula is not new: It appears in the {\it On-line Encyclopedia of Integer Sequences} as the number of $2$-colored patterns of an $n \times n$ chessboard \cite{Sl}.

\begin{theorem}\label{NQ}
For every $n \geq 2$,
\begin{equation}\label{tq}
T_n = \frac{1}{n^2} \sum_{j|n} (\varphi(j))^2 \, j^{\frac{n}{j}} \Big( \frac{n}{j} \Big)!
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}

Observe that for prime $n$ the formula reduces to
$$
T_n = \frac{1}{n^2} \big( (\varphi(1))^2 \, n! + (\varphi(n))^2 \, n \big) = \frac{1}{n} ( (n-1)! + (n-1)^2 )
$$
which agrees with our derivation in \eqref{hayoola}. Table
\ref{teeq} shows the values of $T_n$ for $2 \leq n \leq 15$.

\begin{proof}
By \eqref{soo} and \eqref{ninu},
$$
T_n = \frac{1}{n} \sum_{s|n} s N_n^s = \frac{1}{n^2} \sum_{s|n} \sum_{j|\frac{n}{s}} s \mu(j) \, \varphi(sj) \, (sj)^{\frac{n}{sj}} \Big( \frac{n}{sj} \Big)!
$$
The sum interchange formula
$$
\sum_{s|n} \sum_{j|\frac{n}{s}} f(j,s) = \sum_{j|n} \sum_{s|j} f\Big( \frac{j}{s},s \Big)
$$
then gives
\begin{align*}
T_n & = \frac{1}{n^2} \sum_{j|n} \sum_{s|j} s \mu\Big( \frac{j}{s} \Big) \varphi(j) \, j^{\frac{n}{j}} \Big( \frac{n}{j} \Big)!  \\
& = \frac{1}{n^2} \sum_{j|n} \Big( \sum_{s|j} s \mu\Big( \frac{j}{s} \Big) \Big) \, \varphi(j) \, j^{\frac{n}{j}} \Big( \frac{n}{j} \Big)! \\
& = \frac{1}{n^2} \sum_{j|n} (\varphi(j))^2 \, j^{\frac{n}{j}} \Big( \frac{n}{j} \Big)! \qquad (\text{by} \ \eqref{muu}). \qedhere
\end{align*}
\end{proof}

{\tiny
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{r|cl}
\toprule
$n$ & & $T_n$ \\
\midrule
$2$ & & $1$ \\
$3$ & & $2$ \\
$4$ & & $3$ \\
$5$ & & $8$ \\
$6$ & & $24$ \\
$7$ & & $108$ \\
$8$ & & $640$ \\
$9$ & & $4492$ \\
$10$ & & $36336$ \\
$11$ & & $329900$ \\
$12$ & & $3326788$ \\
$13$ & & $36846288$ \\
$14$ & & $444790512$ \\
$15$ & & $5811886656$ \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\vspace*{4mm}
\caption{\sl The values of $T_n$ for $2 \leq n \leq 15$.}
\label{teeq}
\end{table}
}

It is evident from Table \ref{teeq} that the sequence $\{ T_n \}$ grows rapidly as $n \to \infty$. More quantitatively, we have the following

\begin{theorem}\label{asymp}
$T_n \sim (n-2)!$ as $n \to \infty$.
\end{theorem}

\begin{proof}
This is easy to verify. By \eqref{tq},
$$
\frac{n^2 \, T_n}{n!} = 1 + \frac{(\varphi(n))^2}{(n-1)!} + \frac{1}{n!} \sum_j  (\varphi(j))^2 \, j^\frac{n}{j} \Big( \frac{n}{j} \Big)!
$$
where the sum is taken over all divisors $j$ of $n$ with $1<j<n$. We need
only check that the term on the far right tends to $0$ as $n \to \infty$. If $j|n$ and $1<j<n$, then $j \leq \lfloor n/2 \rfloor$ and $n/j \leq \lfloor n/2 \rfloor$. Hence,
\begin{equation}\label{nina}
(\varphi(j))^2 \, j^{\frac{n}{j}} \Big( \frac{n}{j} \Big)! \leq j^{\frac{n}{j}+2}  \Big( \frac{n}{j} \Big)! \leq \left \lfloor \frac{n}{2} \right \rfloor^{\lfloor n/2 \rfloor +2} \left \lfloor \frac{n}{2} \right \rfloor!
\end{equation}
The Stirling formula $k! \sim \sqrt{2\pi k} \ k^k \, e^{-k}$ for large $k$ gives the estimate
$$
\frac{k^k \ k!}{(2k)!} \leq \operatorname{const.}  \Big( \frac{e}{4} \Big)^k.
$$
Applying this to \eqref{nina} for $k=\lfloor n/2 \rfloor$, we obtain
$$
\frac{1}{n!} (\varphi(j))^2 \, j^\frac{n}{j} \Big( \frac{n}{j} \Big)! \leq \operatorname{const.} n^2 \Big( \frac{e}{4} \Big)^{\frac{n}{2}}.
$$
This yields the upper bound
$$
\frac{1}{n!} \sum_j (\varphi(j))^2 \, j^\frac{n}{j} \Big( \frac{n}{j} \Big)! \leq \operatorname{const.} n^3 \Big( \frac{e}{4} \Big)^{\frac{n}{2}},
$$
which tends to $0$ as $n \to \infty$.
\end{proof}

\section{The distribution of degree}\label{sec:des}

We now turn to the problem of enumerating $n$-cycles with a given degree, using the dynamics of a family of linear endomorphisms of the circle. \vspace{6pt}

\noindent
{\it Convention.} We extend the definition of $N_{n,d}$ to all $d \geq 1$ by setting $N_{n,d}=0$ if $d \geq n-1$.

\subsection{The circle endomorphisms $\mathbf{m}_k$}\label{keek}

For each integer $k \geq 2$, consider the multiplication-by-$k$ map of the circle ${\mathbb R}/{\mathbb Z}$ defined by
$$
\mathbf{m}_k (x):= k x \ \ (\operatorname{mod} \ \ZZ).
$$
Let ${\mathscr O} = \{ x_1, x_2, \ldots, x_n \}$ be a period $n$ orbit of $\mathbf{m}_k$, where the representatives are labeled so that $0 < x_1 < x_2 < \cdots < x_n<1$. We say that ${\mathscr O}$ {\it \bfseries realizes} the cycle $\nu \in {\mathscr C}_n$ if
$$
\mathbf{m}_k(x_i)=x_{\nu(i)} \qquad \text{for all} \ 1 \leq i \leq n.
$$
The orbit ${\mathscr O}$ is said to realize the combinatorial type $[\nu]$ in ${\mathscr C}_n$ if it realizes the conjugate cycle $\rho^j \nu \rho^{-j}$ for some $j$. \vspace{6pt}

It follows from the topological interpretation of degree in \S \ref{DNUM} that if an orbit of $\mathbf{m}_k$ realizes $\nu \in {\mathscr C}_{n,d}$, then necessarily $k \geq d$. Conversely, if $\nu \in {\mathscr C}_{n,d}$ and $k \geq \max\{ d, 2 \}$, there are always periodic orbits of $\mathbf{m}_k$ that realize the combinatorial type $[\nu]$. These orbits are essentially determined by how they are deployed on the circle relative to the $k-1$ fixed points $0,1/(k-1),\ldots,(k-2)/(k-1)$ of $\mathbf{m}_k$, a useful description that makes it possible to enumerate them effectively. Below is a brief outline of how this is accomplished in \cite{PZ}. \vspace{6pt}

Consider $\{ 1, 2, \ldots, n \}$ with its natural cyclic order $\prec$ on three or more points. We define the {\it \bfseries signature} of $\nu \in {\mathscr C}_{n,d}^s$ as the binary vector $\operatorname{sig}(\nu)=(a_1, \ldots, a_n)$, where
$$
a_i := \begin{cases} 1 & \quad \text{if} \ \nu(i) \prec i \prec i+1 \prec \nu(i+1)  \\
0 & \quad \text{otherwise.} \end{cases}
$$
The degree $d=\deg(\nu)$ and symmetry order $s=\operatorname{sym}(\nu)$ are both encoded in the signature: There are precisely $d-1$ entries of $1$ in $\operatorname{sig}(\nu)$. Moreover, $\operatorname{sig}(\nu)$ is $r$-periodic, where $r=n/s$:
\begin{equation}\label{rper}
a_{i+r}=a_i \qquad \text{for all} \ i.
\end{equation}

To any periodic orbit ${\mathscr O}=\{ x_1, x_2, \ldots, x_n \}$ of $\mathbf{m}_k$ that realizes $\nu$, we assign the cumulative {\it \bfseries deployment vector} $\operatorname{dep}({\mathscr O})=(w_1, \ldots, w_{k-1}) \in {\mathbb Z}^{k-1}$ whose components are defined by $w_i := \# ({\mathscr O} \cap (0,i/(k-1)))$. One can check that
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(i)]
$0 \leq w_1 \leq \cdots \leq w_{k-1}=n$, \vspace{6pt}
\item[(ii)]
$a_i=1$ implies $i \in \{ w_1, \ldots, w_{k-1} \}$.
\end{enumerate}
Any integer vector $w=(w_1,\ldots,w_{k-1})$ which satisfies these conditions is called {\it \bfseries $\nu$-admissible}.

\begin{theorem}\label{yagh}
Let $\nu \in {\mathscr C}_{n,d}$ and $k \geq \max\{ d, 2 \}$. For every $\nu$-admissible vector $w \in {\mathbb Z}^{k-1}$ there exists a unique periodic orbit ${\mathscr O}$ of $\mathbf{m}_k$ with $\operatorname{dep}({\mathscr O})=w$ that realizes $\nu$.
\end{theorem}

See \cite[Theorem 7.9]{PZ}. The idea of the proof is to translate the realization problem to the problem of finding the steady-state of an associated regular Markov chain. The theorem shows that in order to enumerate the orbits of $\mathbf{m}_k$ that realize $\nu$ we can simply look at how many $\nu$-admissible vectors in ${\mathbb Z}^{k-1}$ there are. A routine count shows that this number is
$\binom{n+k-d}{n}$ if $a_n=1$ and $\binom{n+k-d-1}{n}$ if $a_n=0$.

\begin{example}
The $6$-cycle $\nu=(1 \, 3 \, 2 \, 4 \, 6 \, 5)$ has degree $d=3$, symmetry order $s=2$, and signature $\operatorname{sig}(\nu)=(0,0,1,0,0,1)$. For the choice $k=4$, the $\nu$-admissible vectors $(w_1, w_2, w_3) \in {\mathbb Z}^3$ are those that satisfy $0 \leq w_1 \leq w_2 \leq w_3=6$ and $\{ 3,6 \} \subset \{ w_1, w_2, w_3 \}$. There are $\binom{6+4-3}{6}=7$ such vectors:
$$
(0,3,6), (1,3,6), (2,3,6), (3,3,6), (3,4,6), (3,5,6), (3,6,6).
$$
Table \ref{tabnew} shows the corresponding $7$ orbits of $\mathbf{m}_4$, guaranteed by \thmref{yagh}.
\end{example}

\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c|cl}
\toprule
$\operatorname{dep}({\mathscr O})$ & & ${\mathscr O}$ \\
\midrule
$(0,3,6)$ & & $\big\{ \frac{183}{455}, \frac{198}{455},  \frac{277}{455}, \frac{337}{455}, \frac{387}{455}, \frac{438}{455} \big\}$ \\[5pt]
$(1,3,6)$ & & $\big\{ \frac{89}{585}, \frac{254}{585}, \frac{356}{585}, \frac{431}{585}, \frac{461}{585}, \frac{554}{585} \big\}$ \\[5pt]
$(2,3,6)$ & & $\big\{ \frac{43}{315}, \frac{58}{315}, \frac{172}{315}, \frac{232}{315}, \frac{247}{315}, \frac{298}{315} \big\}$ \\[5pt]
$(3,3,6)$ & & $\big\{ \frac{101}{1365}, \frac{251}{1365}, \frac{404}{1365}, \frac{1004}{1365}, \frac{1049}{1365}, \frac{1286}{1365} \big\}$ \\[5pt]
$(3,4,6)$ & & $\big\{ \frac{41}{585}, \frac{71}{585}, \frac{164}{585}, \frac{284}{585}, \frac{449}{585}, \frac{551}{585} \big\}$ \\[5pt]
$(3,5,6)$ & & $\big\{ \frac{22}{315}, \frac{37}{315}, \frac{88}{315}, \frac{148}{315}, \frac{163}{315}, \frac{277}{315} \big\}$ \\[5pt]
$(3,6,6)$ & & $\big\{ \frac{94}{1365}, \frac{139}{1365}, \frac{376}{1365}, \frac{556}{1365}, \frac{706}{1365}, \frac{859}{1365} \big\}$ \\[5pt]
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\vspace*{2mm}
\caption{\sl Realizations of the $6$-cycle $(1 \, 3 \, 2 \, 4 \, 6 \, 5)$ under the map $\mathbf{m}_4$, parametrized by their deployment vectors.}
\label{tabnew}
\end{table}

Now take any $\nu \in {\mathscr C}_{n,d}^s$ and let $\operatorname{sig}(\nu)=(a_1,\ldots,a_n)$, $r=n/s$. The combinatorial type $[\nu]$ consists of the conjugates $\rho^{-j} \nu \rho^j$ for $1 \leq j \leq r$, and
$$
\operatorname{sig}(\rho^{-j} \nu \rho^j) = (a_{j+1},\ldots,a_n,a_1,\ldots,a_j).
$$
By the preceding remarks, the number of orbits of $\mathbf{m}_k$ that realize $\rho^{-j} \nu \rho^j$ is ${n+k-d \choose n}$ if $a_j=1$ and is ${n+k-d-1 \choose n}$ if $a_j=0$. By $r$-periodicity \eqref{rper}, the list $a_1, \ldots, a_r$ contains $(d-1)/s$ entries of $1$ and $(n-d+1)/s$ entries of $0$. Thus, the number of distinct orbits of $\mathbf{m}_k$ that realize $[\nu]$ is
$$
\frac{d-1}{s} {n+k-d \choose n} + \frac{n-d+1}{s} {n+k-d-1 \choose n} = \frac{k-1}{s} {n+k-d-1 \choose n-1}.
$$
This proves the following result (compare \cite[Theorem 7.5]{PZ}):

\begin{theorem}\label{real}
If $\nu \in {\mathscr C}_{n,d}^s$ and $k \geq \max \{ d,2 \}$, there are precisely
$$
\frac{k-1}{s} \binom{n+k-d-1}{n-1}
$$
period $n$ orbits of $\mathbf{m}_k$ that realize the combinatorial type $[\nu]$.
\end{theorem}

The following corollary is immediate:

\begin{corollary}\label{nib}
For every $k \geq 2$ and $d \geq 1$, the number of period $n$ orbits of $\mathbf{m}_k$ that realize some element of ${\mathscr C}_{n,d}$ is
$$
\frac{k-1}{n} \binom{n+k-d-1}{n-1} N_{n,d}.
$$
\end{corollary}

\begin{proof}
The claim is trivial if $d>k$ since in this case the number of such orbits and the binomial coefficient $\binom{n+k-d-1}{n-1}$ are both $0$. If $2 \leq d \leq k$, then by \thmref{real} for each divisor $s$ of \mbox{$\gcd(n,d-1)$} there are
$$
\frac{k-1}{s} \binom{n+k-d-1}{n-1} T_{n,d}^s = \frac{k-1}{n} \binom{n+k-d-1}{n-1} N_{n,d}^s
$$
period $n$ orbits of $\mathbf{m}_k$ that realize some element of ${\mathscr C}_{n,d}^s$. The result then follows from \eqref{loo} by summing over all such $s$. Finally, since ${\mathscr C}_{n,1}^n={\mathscr C}_{n,1}$, \thmref{real} shows that there are
$$
\frac{k-1}{n} \binom{n+k-2}{n-1} T_{n,1} = \frac{k-1}{n} \binom{n+k-2}{n-1} N_{n,1}
$$
period $n$ orbits of $\mathbf{m}_k$ that realize some element of ${\mathscr C}_{n,1}$.
\end{proof}

\subsection{The numbers $N_{n,d}$}\label{CNQD}

For $k \geq 2$ let $P_n(k)$ denote the number of periodic points of $\mathbf{m}_k$ of period $n$. The periodic points of $\mathbf{m}_k$ whose period is a divisor of $n$ are precisely the $k^n-1$ solutions of the equation $k^n x = x$ (mod ${\mathbb Z}$). Thus,
\begin{equation}\label{masti}
\sum_{r|n} P_r(k) = k^n-1
\end{equation}
and the M\"{o}bius inversion formula gives
\begin{equation}\label{perrr}
P_n(k) = \sum_{r|n} \mu\Big( \frac{n}{r} \Big) (k^r-1).
\end{equation}
Introduce the integer-valued quantity
$$
\Delta_n(k):= \begin{cases}
\dfrac{P_n(k)}{k-1} & \quad \text{if} \ k \geq 2 \vspace{6pt} \\
\varphi(n) & \quad \text{if} \ k=1. \end{cases}
$$
When $k \geq 2$ we can interpret $\Delta_n(k)$ as the number of period $n$ points of $\mathbf{m}_k$ up to the rotation of the form $x \mapsto x+j/(k-1) \, (\operatorname{mod} {\mathbb Z})$. This is because $\mathbf{m}_k$ and the rotation $x \mapsto x+1/(k-1) \, (\operatorname{mod} {\mathbb Z})$ commute, so $x$ is has period $n$ under $\mathbf{m}_k$ if and only if $x+1/(k-1)$ does. \vspace{6pt}

By \eqref{perrr}, for every $k \geq 2$,
$$
\Delta_n(k) = \sum_{r|n} \mu \Big( \frac{n}{r} \Big) \, \frac{k^r-1}{k-1} = \sum_{r|n} \mu \Big( \frac{n}{r} \Big) \Big(\sum_{j=0}^{r-1} k^j \Big).
$$
If $k=1$, the sum on the far right reduces to $\sum_{r|n} r \mu (n/r)$ which is equal to $\varphi(n)$ by \eqref{muu}. It follows that
\begin{equation}\label{masq}
\Delta_n(k) = \sum_{r|n} \mu \Big( \frac{n}{r} \Big) \Big(\sum_{j=0}^{r-1} k^j \Big) \qquad \text{for all} \ k \geq 1.
\end{equation}
Since $\mathbf{m}_k$ has $P_n(k)/n$ period $n$ {\it orbits} altogether, \corref{nib} shows that for every $k \geq 2$,
$$
\frac{k-1}{n} \sum_{d=1}^{n-2} \binom{n+k-d-1}{n-1} N_{n,d} = \frac{P_n(k)}{n}
$$
or
\begin{equation}\label{mame1}
\sum_{d=1}^{n-2} \binom{n+k-d-1}{n-1} N_{n,d} = \Delta_n(k).
\end{equation}
This is in fact true for every $k \geq 1$ (the case $k=1$ reduces to $N_{n,1}=\Delta_n(1)=\varphi(n)$).

\begin{remark}\label{ghod}
Since the summand in \eqref{mame1} is zero unless $1 \leq d \leq \min(n-2,k)$, we can replace the upper bound of the sum by $k$.
\end{remark}

\begin{theorem}\label{jeeg}
For every $d \geq 1$,
\begin{equation}\label{tada}
N_{n,d} = \sum_{i=1}^d (-1)^{d-i} \binom{n}{d-i} \Delta_n(i).
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}

In particular, the theorem claims vanishing of the sum if $d \geq n-1$. Table \ref{tab3} shows the values of $N_{n,d}$ for $2 \leq n \leq 12$.

{\tiny
\begin{table}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{r|crrrrrrrrrr}
\toprule
\diagbox{$n$}{$d$} & & $1$ & $2$ & $3$ & $4$ & $5$ & $6$ & $7$ & $8$ & $9$ & $10$ \\
\midrule
$2$ & & $1$ & & & & & & & & & \\
$3$ & & $2$ & & & & & & & & & \\
$4$ & & $2$ & $4$ & & & & & & & & \\
$5$ & & $4$ & $10$ & $10$ & & & & & & & \\
$6$ & & $2$ & $42$ & $54$ & $22$ & & & & & &  \\
$7$ & & $6$ & $84$ & $336$ & $252$ & $42$ & & & & & \\
$8$ & & $4$ & $208$ & $1432$ & $2336$ & $980$ & $80$ & & & & \\
$9$ & & $6$ & $450$ & $5508$ & $16548$ & $14238$ & $3402$ & $168$ & & & \\
$10$ & & $4$ & $950$ & $19680$ & $99250$ & $153860$ & $77466$ & $11320$ & $350$ & & \\
$11$ & & $10$ & $1936$ & $66616$ & $534688$ & $1365100$ & $1233760$ & $389224$ & $36784$ & $682$ & \\
$12$ & & $4$ & $3972$ & $217344$ & $2671560$ & $10568280$ & $15593376$ & $8893248$ & $1851096$ & $116580$ & $1340$ \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\vspace*{4mm}
\caption{\sl The distributions $N_{n,d}$ for $2 \leq n \leq 12$.}
\label{tab3}
\end{table}
}

\begin{proof}
This is a form of inversion for binomial coefficients. Use \eqref{mame1} to write
\begin{align*}
& \hspace{5mm} \sum_{i=1}^d (-1)^{d-i} \binom{n}{d-i} \Delta_n(i) & \\
& = \sum_{i=1}^d \sum_{j=1}^{n-2} (-1)^{d-i} \binom{n}{d-i} \binom{n+i-j-1}{n-1} N_{n,j} & \\
& = \sum_{i=1}^d \sum_{j=1}^i (-1)^{d-i} \binom{n}{d-i} \binom{n+i-j-1}{n-1} N_{n,j} & (\text{by \remref{ghod}}) \\
& = \sum_{j=1}^d \left( \sum_{i=j}^d (-1)^{d-i} \binom{n}{d-i} \binom{n+i-j-1}{n-1} \right) N_{n,j}. &
\end{align*}
Thus, \eqref{tada} is proved once we check that
\begin{equation}\label{saq1}
\sum_{i=j}^d (-1)^{d-i} \binom{n}{d-i} \binom{n+i-j-1}{n-1}  = 0 \qquad \text{for} \ j<d.
\end{equation}
Introduce the new variables $a:=i-j$ and $b:=d-j>0$ so \eqref{saq1} takes the form
\begin{equation}\label{saq2}
\sum_{a=0}^b (-1)^a \binom{n}{b-a} \binom{n+a-1}{n-1} = 0.
\end{equation}
The identity
$$
\binom{n}{b-a} \binom{n+a-1}{n-1} = \frac{n}{b} \ \binom{n+a-1}{b-1} \binom{b}{a}
$$
shows that \eqref{saq2} is in turn equivalent to
\begin{equation}\label{saq3}
\sum_{a=0}^b (-1)^a  \binom{n+a-1}{b-1} \binom{b}{a} = 0.
\end{equation}
To prove \eqref{saq3}, consider the binomial expansion
$$
P(x):=x^{n-1}(x+1)^b = \sum_{a=0}^b \binom{b}{a} x^{n+a-1}
$$
and differentiate it $b-1$ times with respect to $x$ to get
$$
P^{(b-1)}(x)= (b-1)! \sum_{a=0}^b \binom{n+a-1}{b-1} \binom{b}{a} x^{n+a-b}.
$$
Since $P$ has a zero of order $b$ at $x=-1$, we have $P^{(b-1)}(-1)=0$ and \eqref{saq3} follows.
\end{proof}

As an application of \thmref{jeeg}, we record the following result which will be invoked in \S \ref{sec:stat}:

\begin{theorem}
The generating function $G_n(x):= \sum_{d=1}^{n-2} N_{n,d} \, x^d$ has the expansion
\begin{equation}\label{genG}
G_n(x)=(1-x)^n \sum_{i \geq 1} \Delta_n(i) \, x^i.
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}

This should be viewed as an equality between formal power series. It is a true equality for $|x|<1$ where the series on the right converges absolutely.\footnote{This is because $\Delta_n(i)$ grows like $i^{n-1}$ for fixed $n$ as $i \to \infty$; compare \lemref{boz}.}

\begin{proof}
For each $d \geq 1$ the coefficient of $x^d$ in the product
$$
(1-x)^n \sum_{i \geq 1} \Delta_n(i) \, x^i = \sum_{j=0}^n (-1)^j \binom{n}{j} x^j \ \cdot \ \sum_{i \geq 1} \Delta_n(i) \, x^i
$$
is $\sum_{i=1}^d (-1)^{d-i} \binom{n}{d-i} \, \Delta_n(i)$. This is $N_{n,d}$ by \eqref{tada}.
\end{proof}

\subsection{The numbers $T_{n,d}$}\label{ttnn}

Our counts for the numbers $N_n^s$ and $N_{n,d}$ lead to the system of linear equations \eqref{foo} and \eqref{loo} on the $N^s_{n,d}$, but such systems are typically under-determined. Thus, additional information is needed to find the  $N^s_{n,d}$ and therefore $T_{n,d}$. The following example serves to illustrates this point, where we use the dynamics of $\mathbf{m}_k$ to obtain this additional information.

\begin{example}\label{teegg}
For $n=8$ there are nine admissible pairs
$$
(d,s)= (1,8), (2,1), (3,1), (3,2), (4,1), (5,1), (5,2), (5,4), (6,1)
$$
(see \exref{hasht}). We record the values of $N^s_{8,d}$ on a grid as shown in \figref{t8}. By \eqref{foo} and \eqref{loo}, the values along the $s$-th row add up to $N_8^s$ and those along the $d$-th column add up to $N_{8,d}$, both available from Tables \ref{tab1} and \ref{tab3}. This immediately gives five of the required nine values:
$$
N^8_{8,1}=4, \quad N^1_{8,2}=208, \quad N^1_{8,4}=2336, \quad N^4_{8,5}=4, \quad N^1_{8,6}=80.
$$
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\begin{overpic}[width=0.6\textwidth]{T8sd.pdf}
\put (19,57) {\footnotesize $4$}
\put (29.7,19) {\footnotesize $208$}
\put (41.5,32) {\footnotesize $N^2_{8,3}$}
\put (41.5,19.3) {\footnotesize $N^1_{8,3}$}
\put (53.8,19) {\footnotesize $2336$}
\put (69.4,44.5) {\footnotesize $4$}
\put (66.6,32) {\footnotesize $N^2_{8,5}$}
\put (66.6,19.3) {\footnotesize $N^1_{8,5}$}
\put (81,19) {\footnotesize $80$}
\put (4,19) {\tiny $1$}
\put (4,32) {\tiny $2$}
\put (4,44) {\tiny $4$}
\put (4,57) {\tiny $8$}
\put (19.5,3) {\tiny $1$}
\put (32,3) {\tiny $2$}
\put (44.5,3) {\tiny $3$}
\put (57.2,3) {\tiny $4$}
\put (70,3) {\tiny $5$}
\put (82.5,3) {\tiny $6$}
\put (7,71) {$s$}
\put (96,6.5) {$d$}
\end{overpic}
\caption{\sl Computation of the joint distribution $N^s_{8,d}$ in \exref{teegg}.}
\label{t8}
\end{figure}
Moreover, it leads to the system of linear equations
\begin{equation}\label{char}
\begin{cases}
N^1_{8,3}+N^2_{8,3} & \! \! = 1432 \\
N^1_{8,5}+N^2_{8,5} & \! \! = 976 \\
N^1_{8,3}+N^1_{8,5} & \! \! = 2368 \\
N^2_{8,3}+N^2_{8,5} & \! \! = 40
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
on the remaining four unknowns which has rank $3$ and therefore does not determine the solution uniquely. An additional piece of information can be obtained by considering the period $8$ orbits of $\mathbf{m}_3$ which realize cycles in ${\mathscr C}^2_{8,3}$ (see \cite{PZ}, especially Theorem 6.6, for the results supporting the following claims). Every such orbit is {\it \bfseries self-antipodal} in the sense that it is invariant under the $180^{\circ}$ rotation $x \mapsto x+1/2$ of the circle ${\mathbb R}/{\mathbb Z}$. It follows that $x$ belongs to such orbit if and only if it satisfies
$$
3^4 x = x+\frac{1}{2} \quad (\operatorname{mod} {\mathbb Z}).
$$
This is equivalent to $x$ being rational of the form
$$
x=\frac{2j-1}{160} \quad (\operatorname{mod} {\mathbb Z}) \quad \text{for some} \ 1 \leq j \leq 80.
$$
Of the $10$ orbits of $\mathbf{m}_3$ thus determined, $4$ realize rotation cycles in ${\mathscr C}^8_{8,1}$ and the remaining $6$ realize cycles in ${\mathscr C}^2_{8,3}$. Moreover, by \thmref{real} every combinatorial type in ${\mathscr C}^2_{8,3}$ is realized by a {\it unique} orbit of $\mathbf{m}_3$. It follows that $N^2_{8,3}=4T^2_{8,3}=24$. Now from \eqref{char} we obtain
$$
N^1_{8,3} = 1408, \quad N^2_{8,3}= 24, \quad
N^1_{8,5} = 960, \quad N^2_{8,5}= 16
$$
and therefore
$$
T_{8,1}=4, \ \ T_{8,2}=26, \ \ T_{8,3}=182, \ \ T_{8,4}=292, \ \ T_{8,5}=126, \ \ T_{8,6}=10.
$$
Observe that $T_8=\sum_{d=1}^6 T_{8,d}=640$, in agreement with the value in Table \ref{teeq} coming from formula \eqref{tq}.
\end{example}

Table \ref{tab4} shows the result of similar but often more complicated dynamical arguments to determine $T_{n,d}$ for $n$ up to $12$. It would be desirable to develop a general method (and perhaps a closed formula) to compute these numbers for arbitrary $n$.

{\tiny
\begin{table}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{r|crrrrrrrrrr}
\toprule
\diagbox{$n$}{$d$} & & $1$ & $2$ & $3$ & $4$ & $5$ & $6$ & $7$ & $8$ & $9$ & $10$\\
\midrule
$2$ & & $1$ & & & & & & & & & \\
$3$ & & $2$ & & & & & & & & & \\
$4$ & & $2$ & $1$ & & & & & & & & \\
$5$ & & $4$ & $2$ & $2$ & & & & & & & \\
$6$ & & $2$ & $7$ & $10$ & $5$ & & & & & & \\
$7$ & & $6$ & $12$ & $48$ & $36$ & $6$ & & & & & \\
$8$ & & $4$ & $26$ & $\color{red}182$ & $292$ & $\color{red}126$ & $10$ & & & & \\
$9$ & & $6$ & $50$ & $612$ & $\color{red}1844$ & $1582$ & $378$ & $\color{red}20$ & & & \\
$10$ & & $4$ & $95$ & $\color{red}1978$ & $9925$ & $\color{red}15408$ & $7753$ & $\color{red}1138$ & $35$ & & \\
$11$ & & $10$ & $176$ & $6056$ & $48608$ & $124100$ & $112160$ & $35384$ & $3344$ & $62$ & \\
$12$ & & $4$ & $331$ & $\color{red}18140$ & $\color{red}222654$ & $\color{red}880848$ & $1299448$ & $\color{red}741260$ & $154258$ & $\color{red}9732$ & $\color{red}113$ \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\vspace*{4mm}
\caption{\sl The distributions $T_{n,d}$ for $2 \leq n \leq 12$. The entries in red cannot be obtained from the sole knowledge of the $N_n^s$ and $N_{n,d}$ in Tables \ref{tab1} and \ref{tab3}.}
\label{tab4}
\end{table}
}

\section{A statistical view of the degree}\label{sec:stat}

\subsection{Classical Eulerian numbers}\label{compp}

The numbers $N_{n,d}$ are the analogs of the {\it \bfseries Eulerian numbers} $A_{n,d}$ which tally the permutations of descent number $d$ in the full symmetric group ${\mathscr S}_n$:\footnote{The numbers $A_{n,d}$ are denoted by $\genfrac{\langle }{\rangle}{0pt}{}{n}{d}$ in \cite{GKP} and by $A(n,d+1)$ in \cite{St}.}
$$
A_{n,d} := \# \big\{ \nu \in {\mathscr S}_n: \operatorname{des}(\nu)=d \big\}.
$$
For each $n$ the index $d$ now runs from $0$ to $n-1$, with \mbox{$A_{n,0}=A_{n,n-1}=1$}. The Eulerian numbers occur in many contexts, including areas outside of combinatorics, and have been studied extensively (for an excellent account, see \cite{P2}). Here are a few of their basic properties:
\vspace{6pt}
\begin{enumerate}
\item[$\bullet$]
{\it Symmetry}:
$$
A_{n,d} = A_{n,n-d-1}.
$$

\item[$\bullet$]
{\it Linear recurrence relation}:
$$
A_{n,d} = (d+1) A_{n-1,d} + (n-d) A_{n-1,d-1}.
$$

\item[$\bullet$]
{\it Worpitzky's identity}:
\begin{equation}\label{worp}
\sum_{d=0}^{n-1} \binom{n+k-d-1}{n} A_{n,d} = k^n \qquad \text{for all} \ k \geq 1
\end{equation}

\item[$\bullet$]
{\it Alternating sum formula}:
\begin{equation}\label{asf}
A_{n,d} = \sum_{i=1}^{d+1} (-1)^{d-i+1} \, \binom{n+1}{d-i+1} \, i^n. \vspace{6pt}
\end{equation}

\item[$\bullet$]
{\it Carlitz's identity}: The generating function $A_n(x) := \sum_{d=0}^{n-1} A_{n,d} \, x^d$ (also known as the $n$-th ``Eulerian polynomial'') satisfies
\begin{equation}\label{genA}
A_n(x) = (1-x)^{n+1} \sum_{i \geq 1} i^n \, x^{i-1}.
\end{equation}
\end{enumerate}

The last three formulas reveal a remarkable similarity between the sequences $ N_{n,d}$ and $A_{n-1,d-1}$. In fact, \eqref{mame1} is the analog of Worpitzky's identity \eqref{worp} for $A_{n-1,d-1}$ once $\Delta_n(k)$ is replaced with $k^{n-1}$. Similarly, \eqref{tada} is the analog of the alternating sum formula \eqref{asf} for $A_{n-1,d-1}$ when we replace $\Delta_n(i)$ with $i^{n-1}$. Finally, \eqref{genG} is the analog of Carlitz's identity \eqref{genA} for $\sum_{d=1}^{n-1} A_{n-1,d-1} \, x^d = x A_{n-1}(x)$, again replacing $\Delta_n(i)$ with $i^{n-1}$. \vspace{6pt}

There is also an analogy between the $N_{n,d}$ and the restricted Eulerian numbers
\begin{equation}\label{ren}
B_{n,d} := \# \big\{ \nu \in {\mathscr C}_n: \operatorname{des}(\nu)=d \big\}.
\end{equation}
In the beautiful paper \cite{DMP} which is motivated by the problem of riffle shuffles of a deck of cards, the authors obtain exact formulas for the distribution of descents in a given conjugacy class of ${\mathscr S}_n$ (see also \cite{F1} for an alternative approach). As a special case, their formulas show that
$$
B_{n,d} = \sum_{i=1}^{d+1} (-1)^{d-i+1} \, \binom{n+1}{d-i+1} \, f_n(i),
$$
where
$$
f_n(i) := \frac{1}{n} \sum_{r|n} \mu \Big( \frac{n}{r} \Big) i^r
$$
is the number of aperiodic circular words of length $n$ from an alphabet of $i$ letters. One cannot help but notice the similarity between the above formula for $B_{n-1,d-1}$ and \eqref{tada}, and between $f_n(i)$ and $\Delta_n(i)$ in \eqref{masq}.

\subsection{Asymptotic normality}\label{asnorm}

The statistical behavior of classical Eulerian numbers is well understood. For example, it is known that the distribution $\{ A_{n,d} \}_{0 \leq d \leq n-1}$ is unimodal with a peak at $d= \lfloor n/2 \rfloor$. Moreover, the descent number of a randomly chosen permutation in ${\mathscr S}_n$ (with respect to the uniform measure) has mean and variance
\begin{align*}
\tilde{\mu}_n & := \frac{1}{n!} \sum_{d=0}^{n-1} d A_{n,d} = \frac{n-1}{2} \\
\tilde{\sigma}^2_n & := \frac{1}{n!} \sum_{d=0}^{n-1} (d-\tilde{\mu}_n)^2 A_{n,d} = \frac{n+1}{12}.
\end{align*}
These computations can be expressed in terms of the generating functions $A_n$ introduced in \S \ref{compp}:
\begin{align}
\frac{A'_n(1)}{n!} & = \frac{n-1}{2} \label{EN1} \vspace{6pt} \\
\frac{A''_n(1)}{n!} + \frac{A'_n(1)}{n!} - \left( \frac{A'_n(1)}{n!} \right)^2 & = \frac{n+1}{12}. \label{VN1}
\end{align}
When normalized by its mean and variance, the distribution $\{ A_{n,d} \}_{0 \leq d \leq n-1}$ converges to the standard normal distribution as $n \to \infty$ (see \cite{B}, \cite{H}, \cite{Pi}). This is the central limit theorem for Eulerian numbers. In fact, we have the error bound
$$
\sup_{x \in {\mathbb R}} \left| \frac{1}{n!} \sum_{d \leq \tilde{\sigma}_n x + \tilde{\mu}_n} A_{n,d} - \frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi}} \int_{-\infty}^x e^{-t^2/2} \, dt \right| = O(n^{-1/2}).
$$

Similar results hold for the restricted Eulerian numbers $B_{n,d}$ defined in \eqref{ren}. In \cite{F1}, Fulman shows that the mean and variance of $\operatorname{des}(\nu)$ for a randomly chosen $\nu \in {\mathscr C}_n$ are also $(n-1)/2$ and $(n+1)/12$ provided that $n \geq 3$ and $n \geq 4$ respectively. More generally, he shows that the $k$-th moment of $\operatorname{des}(\nu)$ for $\nu \in {\mathscr C}_n$ is equal to the $k$-th moment of $\operatorname{des}(\nu)$ for $\nu \in {\mathscr S}_n$ provided that $n \geq 2k$. From this result one can immediately conclude that the normalized distribution $B_{n,d}$ is also asymptotically normal as $n \to \infty$. \vspace{6pt}

Below we will prove corresponding results for the distribution of degree for randomly chosen $n$-cycles.

\begin{theorem}\label{exp}
The mean and variance of $\deg(\nu)$ for a randomly chosen $\nu \in {\mathscr C}_n$ (with respect to the uniform measure) are
\begin{align*}
\mu_n & := \frac{1}{(n-1)!} \sum_{d=1}^{n-2} d N_{n,d} = \frac{n}{2}-\frac{1}{n-1} & (n \geq 3), \\
\sigma^2_n & := \frac{1}{(n-1)!} \sum_{d=1}^{n-2} (d-\mu_n)^2 N_{n,d} = \frac{n}{12}+\frac{n}{(n-1)^2(n-2)} & (n \geq 5).
\end{align*}
\end{theorem}

\begin{proof}
The argument is inspired by the method of \cite[Theorem 2]{F1}. We begin by using  the formula \eqref{masq} for $\Delta_n(i)$ in the equation \eqref{genG} to express the generating function $G_n$ in terms of the Eulerian polynomials $A_j$ in \eqref{genA}:
\begin{align}\label{divo}
G_n(x) & = (1-x)^n \sum_{i \geq 1} \sum_{r|n} \sum_{j=0}^{r-1} \mu \Big( \frac{n}{r} \Big) \, i^j x^i \notag \\
& = (1-x)^n \sum_{i \geq 1} \sum_{j=0}^{n-1} i^j x^i + (1-x)^n \sum_{i \geq 1} \sum_{\substack{r|n \\ r<n}} \sum_{j=0}^{r-1} \mu \Big( \frac{n}{r} \Big) \, i^j x^i \notag \\
& = \sum_{j=0}^{n-1} x(1-x)^{n-j-1} A_j(x) + \sum_{\substack{r|n \\ r<n}} \sum_{j=0}^{r-1} \mu \Big( \frac{n}{r} \Big) \, x(1-x)^{n-j-1} A_j(x).
\end{align}
If $n \geq 3$, every index $j$ in the double sum in \eqref{divo} is $\leq n-3$, so the polynomial in $x$ defined by this double sum has $(1-x)^2$ as a factor. It follows that for $n \geq 3$,
$$
G_n(x)=x A_{n-1}(x)+ x(1-x) A_{n-2}(x) + O((1-x)^2)
$$
as $x \to 1$. This gives
$$
G'_n(1) = A'_{n-1}(1)+A_{n-1}(1)-A_{n-2}(1),
$$
so by \eqref{EN1}
$$
\mu_n = \frac{G'_n(1)}{(n-1)!} = \frac{n-2}{2}+1-\frac{1}{n-1}= \frac{n}{2}-\frac{1}{n-1}.
$$
Similarly, if $n \geq 5$, every index $j$ in the double sum in \eqref{divo} is $\leq n-4$, so the polynomial defined by this double sum has $(1-x)^3$ as a factor. It follows that for $n \geq 5$,
$$
G_n(x)=x A_{n-1}(x)+ x(1-x) A_{n-2}(x) + x(1-x)^2 A_{n-3}(x) + O((1-x)^3)
$$
as $x \to 1$. This gives
$$
G''_n(1) = A''_{n-1}(1)+2A'_{n-1}(1)-2A'_{n-2}(1)-2A_{n-2}(1)+2A_{n-3}(1).
$$
A straightforward computation using \eqref{EN1} and \eqref{VN1} then shows that
\[
\sigma^2_n = \frac{G''_n(1)}{(n-1)!} + \frac{G'_n(1)}{(n-1)!} - \left( \frac{G'_n(1)}{(n-1)!} \right)^2 = \frac{n}{12} + \frac{n}{(n-1)^2(n-2)}. \qedhere
\]
\end{proof}

\begin{remark}
More generally, the expression \eqref{divo} shows that for fixed $k$ and large enough $n$,
$$
G_n(x)=\sum_{j=0}^k x(1-x)^j A_{n-j-1}(x) + O((1-x)^{k+1})
$$
as $x \to 1$. Differentiating this $k$ times and evaluating at $x=1$, we obtain the relation
$$
G_n^{(k)}(1)= \sum_{j=0}^k (-1)^j \left( \binom{k}{j} j! \ A^{(k-j)}_{n-j-1}(1) + \binom{k}{j+1} (j+1)! \ A^{(k-j-1)}_{n-j-1}(1) \right)
$$
which in theory links the moments of $\deg(\nu)$ for $\nu \in {\mathscr C}_n$ to the moments of $\operatorname{des}(\nu)$ for $\nu \in {\mathscr S}_j$ for $n-k \leq j \leq n-1$.
\end{remark}

Numerical evidence suggest that the distribution $\{ N_{n,d} \}_{1 \leq d \leq n-2}$ is also unimodal and reaches a peak at $d= \lfloor n/2 \rfloor$. \thmref{asnor} below asserts that when normalized by its mean and variance, the distribution $\{ N_{n,d} \}_{1 \leq d \leq n-2}$ converges to normal as $n \to \infty$. In particular, the asymmetry of the numbers $N_{n,d}$ relative to $d$ will asymptotically disappear. These facts are illustrated in \figref{normal}. \vspace{6pt}

Consider the sequence of normalized random variables
$$
X_n := \frac{1}{\sigma_n} \big( \deg|_{{\mathscr C}_n} - \mu_n \big).
$$
Let ${\mathcal N}(0,1)$ denote the normally distributed random variable having  mean $0$ and variance $1$.

\begin{theorem}\label{asnor}
$X_n \to {\mathcal N}(0,1)$ in distribution as $n \to \infty$.
\end{theorem}

The proof follows the strategy of \cite{FKL} and makes use of the following variant of a classical theorem of Curtiss. Recall that the {\it \bfseries moment generating function} $M_X$ of a random variable $X$ is the expected value of $e^{sX}$:
$$
M_X(s):={\mathbb E}(e^{sX}) \qquad \qquad (s \in {\mathbb R}).
$$

\begin{lemma}[\cite{KL2}]\label{kl}
Let $\{ X_n \}_{n \geq 1}$ and $Y$ be random variables and assume that $\lim_{n \to \infty} M_{X_n}(s)=M_{Y}(s)$ for all $s$ in some non-empty open interval in ${\mathbb R}$. Then $X_n \to Y$ in distribution as $n \to \infty$.
\end{lemma}

The proof of \thmref{asnor} via \lemref{kl} will depend on two preliminary estimates.

\begin{lemma}\label{boz}
For every $\varepsilon>0$ there are constants $n(\varepsilon), i(\varepsilon)>0$ such that
$$
\Delta_n(i) \begin{cases} \ \leq (1+\varepsilon) \, i^{n-1} & \text{if} \ n \geq 2 \ \text{and} \ i \geq i(\varepsilon) \vspace{6pt} \\
\ \geq (1-\varepsilon) \, i^{n-1} & \text{if} \ n \geq n(\varepsilon) \ \text{and} \ i \geq 2.
\end{cases}
$$
\end{lemma}

\begin{proof}
By \eqref{masti},
$$
\Delta_n(i) \leq \sum_{r|n} \Delta_r(i) = \frac{i^n-1}{i-1}.
$$
The upper bound follows since $(i^n-1)/(i-1)<(1+\varepsilon) i^{n-1}$ for all $n$ if $i$ is large enough depending on $\varepsilon$. \vspace{6pt}

For the lower bound, first note that the inequality $(i^r-1)/(i-1) \leq 2 i^{r-1}$ holds for all $r \geq 1$ and all $i \geq 2$. Thus, by \eqref{masq}, we can estimate
\begin{align*}
\Delta_n(i) & \geq \frac{i^n-1}{i-1} - \sum_{\substack{r|n \\ r<n}}  \frac{i^r-1}{i-1} \geq i^{n-1} - \sum_{\substack{r|n \\ r<n}} 2i^{r-1} \\
& \geq i^{n-1} - 2 \sum_{r=1}^{\lfloor n/2 \rfloor} i^{r-1} \geq i^{n-1} - 2 \ \frac{i^{n/2}-1}{i-1} \\
& \geq i^{n-1} - 4 i^{n/2-1}.
\end{align*}
The last term is bounded below by $(1-\varepsilon) i^{n-1}$ for all $i$ if $n$ is large enough depending on $\varepsilon$.
\end{proof}

\begin{lemma}[\cite{FKL}]\label{jag}
For every $0<x<1$ and $n \geq 1$,
$$
\frac{(n-1)! \, x}{(\log(1/x))^n} \leq \sum_{i \geq 2} i^{n-1} x^i \leq \frac{(n-1)!}{x (\log(1/x))^n}.
$$
\end{lemma}

\begin{proof}
By elementary calculus,
$$
\sum_{i \geq 2} i^{n-1} x^i \leq \int_0^{\infty} u^{n-1} x^{u-1} \, du = \frac{(n-1)!}{x (\log(1/x))^n}
$$
and
\[
\sum_{i \geq 2} i^{n-1} x^i \geq \int_0^{\infty} u^{n-1} x^{u+1} \, du = \frac{(n-1)! \, x}{(\log(1/x))^n}. \qedhere
\]
\end{proof}

\begin{proof}[Proof of \thmref{asnor}]
By \lemref{kl} it suffices to show that $\lim_{n \to \infty} M_{X_n}(s) = M_{{\mathcal N}(0,1)}(s)=e^{s^2/2}$ for all negative values of $s$. Fix an $s<0$ and set $0<x := e^{s/\sigma_n}<1$ (we will think of $x$ as a function of $n$, with $\lim_{n \to \infty} x=1$). Notice that by \thmref{exp}
\begin{equation}\label{khak}
\mu_n = \frac{n}{2} + O(n^{-1}) \quad \text{and} \quad \sigma^2_n = \frac{n}{12} + O(n^{-2}) \quad \text{as} \ n \to \infty.
\end{equation}
Using \eqref{genG}, we can write
\begin{align*}
M_{X_n}(s) & = {\mathbb E}(e^{sX_n}) = \frac{e^{-s \mu_n/\sigma_n}}{(n-1)!} \, G_n(e^{s/\sigma_n}) = \frac{x^{-\mu_n}}{(n-1)!} \,  G_n(x) \\
& = \frac{x^{1-\mu_n}(1-x)^n  \varphi(n)}{(n-1)!} +  \frac{x^{-\mu_n}(1-x)^n}{(n-1)!} \sum_{i \geq 2} \Delta_n(i) x^i.
\end{align*}
As the first term is easily seen to tend to zero, it suffices to show that
\begin{equation}\label{laboo}
H_n := \frac{x^{-\mu_n}(1-x)^n}{(n-1)!} \sum_{i \geq 2} \Delta_n(i) x^i \xrightarrow{n \to \infty} e^{s^2/2}.
\end{equation}
By \eqref{khak} we have the estimate
$$
1-x = -\frac{s}{\sigma_n} - \frac{s^2}{2 \sigma^2_n} + O(n^{-3/2}).
$$
This, combined with the basic expansion
$$
\log \left(\frac{1-x}{\log(1/x)} \right) = -\frac{1}{2} (1-x) - \frac{5}{24} (1-x)^2 + O((1-x)^3),
$$
shows that
\begin{equation}\label{hulu}
\left(\frac{1-x}{\log(1/x)} \right)^n = \exp \left( \frac{ns}{2\sigma_n} + \frac{n s^2}{24 \sigma^2_n} + O(n^{-1/2}) \right).
\end{equation}
Take any $\varepsilon>0$ and find $n(\varepsilon)$ from \lemref{boz}. Then, if $n \geq n(\varepsilon)$,
\begin{align*}
H_n & \geq \frac{x^{-\mu_n}(1-x)^n}{(n-1)!} \, (1-\varepsilon) \sum_{i \geq 2} i^{n-1} x^i & \\
& \geq (1-\varepsilon) \, x^{1-\mu_n} \left(\frac{1-x}{\log(1/x)} \right)^n & (\text{by \lemref{jag}}) \\
& = (1-\varepsilon) \exp \left( \frac{s(1-\mu_n)}{\sigma_n} +\frac{ns}{2\sigma_n} + \frac{n s^2}{24 \sigma^2_n} + O(n^{-1/2}) \right) & (\text{by \eqref{hulu}}) \\
& = (1-\varepsilon) \exp \left( \frac{s(1+O(n^{-1}))}{\sigma_n} + \frac{s^2}{2+O(n^{-3})} + O(n^{-1/2}) \right) & (\text{by \eqref{khak}}).
\end{align*}
Taking the $\liminf$ as $n \to \infty$ and then letting $\varepsilon \to 0$, we obtain
$$
\liminf_{n \to \infty} H_n \geq e^{s^2/2}.
$$
Similarly, take any $\varepsilon>0$, find $i(\varepsilon)$ from \lemref{boz} and use the basic inequality $\Delta_n(i) \leq (i^n-1)/(i-1) \leq 2i^{n-1}$ for all $n,i \geq 2$ to estimate
\begin{align*}
H_n & = \frac{x^{-\mu_n}(1-x)^n}{(n-1)!} \left( \sum_{2 \leq i <i(\varepsilon)} + \sum_{i \geq i(\varepsilon)} \right) \Delta_n(i) x^i \\
& \leq \frac{2x^{-\mu_n}(1-x)^n}{(n-1)!} \sum_{2 \leq i <i(\varepsilon)} i^{n-1} x^i +  \frac{(1+\varepsilon) x^{-\mu_n}(1-x)^n}{(n-1)!} \sum_{i \geq i(\varepsilon)} i^{n-1} x^i.
\end{align*}
The first term is a polynomial in $x$ and is easily seen to tend to zero as $n \to \infty$. The second term is bounded above by
\begin{align*}
& (1+\varepsilon) \, x^{-1-\mu_n} \left(\frac{1-x}{\log(1/x)} \right)^n & (\text{by \lemref{jag}}) \\
= & (1+\varepsilon) \exp \left( \frac{s(-1-\mu_n)}{\sigma_n} + \frac{ns}{2\sigma_n} + \frac{n s^2}{24 \sigma^2_n} + O(n^{-1/2}) \right) & (\text{by \eqref{hulu}}) \\
= & (1+\varepsilon) \exp \left( \frac{s(-1+O(n^{-1}))}{\sigma_n} + \frac{s^2}{2+O(n^{-3})} + O(n^{-1/2}) \right) & (\text{by \eqref{khak}})
\end{align*}
Taking the $\limsup$ as $n \to \infty$ and then letting $\varepsilon \to 0$, we obtain
$$
\limsup_{n \to \infty} H_n \leq e^{s^2/2}.
$$
This verifies \eqref{laboo} and completes the proof.
\end{proof}

Dynamical Systems (math.DS); Combinatorics (math.CO); Probability (math.PR)


How to generalize (and not to generalize) the Chu--Vandermonde identity

Abstract: We consider two different interpretations of the Chu--Vandermonde identity: as an identity for polynomials, and as an identity for infinite matrices. Each interpretation leads to a class of possible generalizations, and in both cases we obtain a complete characterization of the solutions.

\section*{1. Introduction.}

One of the most celebrated formulae of elementary combinatorics
is the Chu--Vandermonde identity
\begin{equation}
   \sum_{k=0}^n \binom{x}{k} \binom{y}{n-k}  \;=\;  \binom{x+y}{n}
 \label{eq.vandermonde}
\end{equation}
(where $n$ is a nonnegative integer);%
\begin{CJK}{UTF8}{bsmi}
it was found by Chu Shih-Chieh (Zh\={u} Sh\`{\i}ji\'e, 朱世杰)%
\end{CJK}
sometime before 1303 \cite{Zhu_2006}
and was rediscovered circa 1772 by Alexandre-Th\'eophile Vandermonde
\cite{Vandermonde_1772}.
If we take $x$ and $y$ to be nonnegative integers,
this identity has a well-known combinatorial interpretation and proof:
we can choose an $n$-person committee from a group of $x$ women and $y$ men
in $\binom{x+y}{n}$ ways;
on the other hand, if this committee is to have $k$ women and $n-k$ men,
then the number of ways is $\binom{x}{k} \binom{y}{n-k}$;
summing over all possible values of $k$ gives the result.
But now, having proven the identity for nonnegative integer $x$~and~$y$,
we can shift gears and regard $x$~and~$y$ as algebraic indeterminates:
then both sides of \reff{eq.vandermonde} are polynomials in $x$~and~$y$
(of total degree~$n$),
which agree whenever $x$~and~$y$ are nonnegative integers;
since two polynomials that agree at infinitely many points must be equal,
it follows that \reff{eq.vandermonde} holds as a polynomial identity
in $x$~and~$y$.

We thus see already from this brief account that the Chu--Vandermonde identity
can be given at least two distinct interpretations.
On the one hand, we can regard $x$~and~$y$ as indeterminates;
then \reff{eq.vandermonde} is the identity
\begin{equation}
    \sum_{k=0}^n f_k(x) \, f_{n-k}(y)  \;=\;  f_n(x+y)
 \label{eq.fksum}
\end{equation}
for the polynomials
\begin{equation}
   f_n(x)  \;=\;  \binom{x}{n}  \;\stackrel{\rm def}{=}\; {x^{\underline{n}} \over n!}
           \;\stackrel{\rm def}{=}\; {x(x-1) \cdots (x-n+1) \over n!}
           \;\in\; {\mathbb Q}[x]
   \;.
 \label{def.f.binomial}
\end{equation}
(Of course, $x$ and $y$ can then be specialized, if we wish,
to specific values in any commutative ring containing the rationals,
such as the real or complex numbers.)
On the other hand, we can restrict $x$ and $y$ to be nonnegative integers;
then \reff{eq.vandermonde} is the identity
\begin{equation}
   \sum_{j=0}^n L_{ij} \, L_{\ell,n-j}  \;=\;  L_{i+\ell,n}
 \label{eq.identity.L}
\end{equation}
for the infinite lower-triangular Pascal matrix
\cite{Call_93,Aceto_01,Edelman_04}
$L = (L_{ij})_{i,j \ge 0}$ defined by
\begin{equation}
   L_{ij}  \;=\;  \binom{i}{j}
   \;.
 \label{def.L.pascal}
\end{equation}

At this point it is natural to ask for generalizations of
\reff{eq.fksum}/\reff{def.f.binomial}
and \reff{eq.identity.L}/\reff{def.L.pascal}, respectively.
Are there other sequences ${\bm{f}} = (f_n)_{n \ge 0}$
of polynomials (or formal power series) satisfying \reff{eq.fksum},
and if so, can we classify them all?
Likewise, are there other lower-triangular matrices $L = (L_{ij})_{i,j \ge 0}$
satisfying \reff{eq.identity.L}, and if so, can we classify them?
The answer to the first question is well known,
and we will review it here (and extend it slightly).
Then we will give a negative answer to the second question,
but with an interesting twist;
some of these latter results seem to be new.

\bigskip

\section*{2. Convolution families.}

Let $R$ be a commutative ring,
and let ${\bm{f}} = (f_n)_{n \ge 0}$
be a sequence of formal power series $f_n(x) \in R[[x]]$.
We will call ${\bm{f}}$ a {\em convolution family}\/
\cite{Knuth_92} (see also \cite{Labelle_80,Zeng_96})
if it satisfies \reff{eq.fksum};
and we will call ${\bm{f}}$ a {\em weak convolution family}\/
if it satisfies \reff{eq.fksum} restricted to $x=y$:
\begin{equation}
    \sum_{k=0}^n f_k(x) \, f_{n-k}(x)  \;=\;  f_n(2x)
   \;.
 \label{eq.fksum.weak}
\end{equation}
We use the notation $[t^n] \, F(t)$
to denote the coefficient of $t^n$ in the formal power series (or polynomial)
$F(t) \in R[[t]]$.
We then have the following characterization of (weak) convolution families:

\begin{proposition}[Characterization of convolution families]
   \label{prop.convfamily}
Let $R$ be a commutative ring containing the rationals,
and let $\Psi(t) = \sum_{n=0}^\infty \psi_n t^n \in R[[t]]$
be any formal power series.
Then
\begin{equation}
   f_n(x)  \;=\;  [t^n] \, e^{x \Psi(t)}
 \label{eq.fn.G.H}
\end{equation}
defines a convolution family in $R[[x]]$.
Moreover, $\widetilde{f}_n(x) \stackrel{\rm def}{=} f_n(x) / e^{\psi_0 x}$
are polynomials in $x$ with $\deg \widetilde{f}_n \le n$
and satisfying $\widetilde{f}_n(0) = 0$ for $n \ge 1$.
[In~particular, the $f_n$ are themselves polynomials for all $n$
 if and only if $\psi_0$ is nilpotent,
 and are polynomials of degree at most $n$ for all $n$
 if and only if $\psi_0 = 0$.]

Conversely, let $R$ be a commutative ring containing the rationals
in which the only idempotents are 0 and 1
(for instance, an integral domain or a local ring),
and let ${\bm{f}} = (f_n)_{n \ge 0}$ be a weak convolution family in $R[[x]]$.
Then either ${\bm{f}}$ is identically zero,
or else there exists a unique formal power series $\Psi \in R[[t]]$
such that \reff{eq.fn.G.H} holds.
In~particular, ${\bm{f}}$ is actually a convolution family,
and the foregoing statements about $\widetilde{f}_n$ hold.
\end{proposition}

\par\medskip\noindent{\sc Proof.\ }
By taking the coefficient of $t^n$ on both sides of the identity
$e^{x \Psi(t)} e^{y \Psi(t)} = e^{(x+y) \Psi(t)}$,
we see, using \reff{eq.fn.G.H}, that
\begin{equation}
    \sum_{k=0}^n f_k(x) \, f_{n-k}(y)  \;=\;  f_n(x+y)
    \;,
\end{equation}
or in other words that ${\bm{f}}$ is a convolution family.
Moreover, it is easy to see that
$f_n(x)/e^{\psi_0 x} = [t^n] \, e^{x [\Psi(t) - \psi_0]}$
is a polynomial in $x$ of degree at most $n$,
which has zero constant term for $n \ge 1$.
For the statements in brackets, ``if'' is easy,
and ``only if'' follows by looking at $n=0$.

For the converse, let us use the notation $f_{nk} = [x^k] \, f_n(x)$.
By using \reff{eq.fksum.weak} specialized to $n=0$ and $x=0$,
we see that $f_{00}^2 = f_{00}$;
so the hypothesis on $R$ implies that either $f_{00} = 0$ or $f_{00} = 1$.
If $f_{00} = 0$, then a simple inductive argument using
\reff{eq.fksum.weak} specialized to $n=0$
shows that $f_{0k} = 0$ for all $k$, i.e., $f_0 = 0$;
and then a second inductive argument using \reff{eq.fksum.weak}
shows that $f_n = 0$ for all $n$.
So we can assume that $f_{00} = 1$.
Define the bivariate ordinary generating function
$F(x,t) = \sum_{n=0}^\infty f_n(x) \, t^n \in R[[x,t]]$.
Since $F$ has constant term $f_{00} = 1$,
we can define $L(x,t) = \log F(x,t) \in R[[x,t]]$,
which has constant term 0.
The identity \reff{eq.fksum.weak}, translated to generating functions,
says that $F(x,t)^2 = F(2x,t)$, or equivalently that $2 L(x,t) = L(2x,t)$.
Writing $L(x,t) = \sum_{k=0}^\infty \ell_k(t) \, x^k$,
we see that $\sum_{k=0}^\infty (2 - 2^k) \, \ell_k(t) \, x^k = 0$
as a power series in $x$,
hence that $\ell_k(t) = 0$ for all $k \neq 1$.
It follows that $L(x,t) = x \Psi(t)$ for some $\Psi \in R[[t]]$.
Therefore $f_n(x) = [t^n] \, e^{x \Psi(t)}$,
as claimed in \reff{eq.fn.G.H}.
Indeed, \reff{eq.fn.G.H} says precisely that $L(x,t) = x \Psi(t)$,
so $\Psi$ is uniquely determined by ${\bm{f}}$.
\hbox{\hskip 6pt\vrule width6pt height7pt depth1pt \hskip1pt}\bigskip

\bigskip

\noindent
{\bf Examples of convolution families.}
1.  The binomial theorem corresponds to $f_n(x) = x^n/n!$
and $\Psi(t) = t$.

2.  The Chu--Vandermonde identity corresponds to
$f_n(x) = \binom{x}{n} = x^{\underline{n}}/n!$
and $\Psi(t) = \log(1 + t)$.

3.  The ``dual Chu--Vandermonde identity'' corresponds to
$f_n(x) = \binom{x+n-1}{n} = x^{\overline{n}}/n!$
and $\Psi(t) = -\log(1 - t)$.

4.  Define the univariate Bell polynomials
$B_n(x) = \sum_{k=0}^n \stirlingsubset{n}{k} x^k$,
where the Stirling number $\stirlingsubset{n}{k}$
is the number of partitions of an $n$-element set into $k$ nonempty blocks
\cite{Graham_94}.
Then $f_n(x) = B_n(x)/n!$ corresponds to $\Psi(t) = e^t - 1$.

\bigskip

\noindent
See \cite{Knuth_92} for many further examples.

\bigskip
\bigskip

\noindent
{\bf Remarks.}
1.  Proposition~\ref{prop.convfamily} is a slight extension of
\cite[Theorem~4.1]{Garsia_73}, \cite{Knuth_92}
and \cite[Exercise~5.37a]{Stanley_99},
in two directions:
allowing the $f_n$ to be formal power series rather than just polynomials,
and allowing the coefficients to lie in a commutative ring containing
the rationals rather than just a field of characteristic~0.
Knuth \cite{Knuth_92} proved the converse half by an inductive argument
based on carefully examining the coefficients $f_{nk}$.
This is nice, but it seems to me that the generating-function argument
using the logarithm, taken from \cite{Garsia_73,Stanley_99},
is simpler and more enlightening.

2.  For the converse, it would alternatively suffice to assume that
\reff{eq.fksum} holds for $y = rx$
for {\em any}\/ fixed rational number $r \neq 0,-1$ (not just $r=1$):
we would then have $L(x,t) + L(rx,t) = L((1+r)x,t)$,
which also implies $L(x,t) = x \Psi(t)$
since $1 + r^m \neq (1+r)^m$ for all $m \in {\mathbb N} \setminus \{1\}$
and all $r \in {\mathbb Q} \setminus \{0,-1\}$.

3.  By iterating \reff{eq.fksum}, we see that every convolution family ${\bm{f}}$
satisfies
\begin{equation}
    \sum\limits_{\begin{scarray}
                    k_1,\ldots,k_m \ge 0 \\
                    k_1 + \ldots + k_m = n
                 \end{scarray}}
    \!\!\!\!\!
    f_{k_1}(x_1) \,\cdots\, f_{k_m}(x_m)  \;=\;  f_n(x_1 + \ldots + x_m)
 \label{eq.fksum.iterated}
\end{equation}
for each integer $m \ge 1$.
This ``multinomial'' version of the identity is sometimes useful.

4.  The foregoing theory can equivalently be expressed
in terms of the polynomials $F_n(x) = n! \, f_n(x)$, which satisfy
\begin{equation}
    \sum_{k=0}^n \binom{n}{k} F_k(x) \, F_{n-k}(y)  \;=\;  F_n(x+y)
    \;.
 \label{eq.Fksum.binomial}
\end{equation}
Sequences of polynomials satisfying \reff{eq.Fksum.binomial}
are called {\em sequences of binomial type}\/;
they were introduced by Rota and collaborators
\cite{Mullin_70,Rota_73,Garsia_73,Fillmore_73,Roman_78,Roman_84}
and studied by means of the umbral calculus
\cite{Roman_78,Roman_84,Rota_94,Gessel_03}.\footnote{
   As part of the definition of ``sequence of binomial type'',
   Rota {\em et al.}\/ \cite{Mullin_70,Rota_73}
   and many subsequent authors \cite{Garsia_73,Fillmore_73,Roman_78,Roman_84}
   imposed the additional condition that $\deg F_n = n$ exactly.
   But this condition is irrelevant for our purposes,
   so we refrain from imposing it.
}
A purely combinatorial approach to sequences of binomial type,
employing the theory of species,
has been developed by Labelle \cite{Labelle_81}
(see also \cite[Section~3.1]{Bergeron_98}).
See also \cite{Zeng_96,Scott-Sokal_expidentities}
for some multivariate generalizations.

The identity \reff{eq.Fksum.binomial}
is closely related to the {\em exponential formula}\/
\cite{Wilf_94,Bergeron_98,Stanley_99}
in enumerative combinatorics,
which relates the weights $c_n$ of ``connected'' objects
to the weights $F_n(x)$ of ``all'' objects,
when the weight of an object is defined to be the product of the weights
of its ``connected components'' times a factor $x$ for each
connected component.
See \cite{Wilf_94,Bergeron_98,Stanley_99,Scott-Sokal_expidentities}
for further discussion and many applications.
 $\blacksquare$ \bigskip

\bigskip

\noindent
{\bf Open questions.}
What happens if $R$ does not contain the rationals,
or if $R$ has idempotents other than 0 and 1?

\bigskip

\section*{3. Convolution families, generalized.}

Let us now generalize the identity \reff{eq.fksum}
by allowing three different sequences $f,g,h$ in place of $f,f,f$:
\begin{equation}
   \sum_{k=0}^n f_k(x) \, g_{n-k}(y)  \;=\;  h_n(x+y)
   \;.
 \label{eq.conv.fgh}
\end{equation}
Do any new solutions arise?
It turns out that the answer is yes, as follows:

\begin{proposition}
   \label{prop.convfamily.bis}
Let $R$ be a commutative ring containing the rationals,
and let $A,B,\Psi \in R[[t]]$.  Then
\begin{equation}
   f_n(x)  \:=\:  [t^n] \, A(t) e^{x \Psi(t)}  \:,\quad
   g_n(x)  \:=\:  [t^n] \, B(t) e^{x \Psi(t)}  \:,\quad
   h_n(x)  \:=\:  [t^n] \, A(t) B(t) e^{x \Psi(t)}
 \label{eq.prop.convfamily.bis}
\end{equation}
are sequences in $R[[x]]$ satisfying \reff{eq.conv.fgh}.
Moreover, $\widetilde{f}_n(x) \stackrel{\rm def}{=} f_n(x) / e^{\psi_0 x}$
[where $\psi_0 \stackrel{\rm def}{=} \Psi(0)$]
are polynomials in $x$ with $\deg \widetilde{f}_n \le n$,
and likewise for $g_n$ and $h_n$.
[In~particular, the $f_n,g_n,h_n$ are themselves polynomials for all $n$
 if and only if $\psi_0$ is nilpotent,
 and are polynomials of degree at most $n$ for all $n$
 if and only if $\psi_0 = 0$.]

Conversely, let $R$ be a commutative ring containing the rationals,
and let
${\bm{f}} = (f_n)_{n \ge 0}$, ${\bm{g}} = (g_n)_{n \ge 0}$, ${\bm{h}} = (h_n)_{n \ge 0}$
be sequences in $R[[x]]$ satisfying \reff{eq.conv.fgh}.
Assume further that $f_0(0)$ and $g_0(0)$ are invertible in $R$
[or equivalently that $h_0(0) = f_0(0) \, g_0(0)$ is invertible in $R$].
Then there exist unique formal power series $A,B,\Psi \in R[[t]]$
such that \reff{eq.prop.convfamily.bis} holds;
and $A$ and $B$ are invertible in $R[[t]]$.
\end{proposition}

\par\medskip\noindent{\sc Proof.\ }
By taking the coefficient of $t^n$ on both sides of the identity
$A(t) e^{x \Psi(t)} \, B(t) e^{y \Psi(t)} = {A(t) B(t) e^{(x+y) \Psi(t)}}$,
we see that \reff{eq.conv.fgh} holds.
The statements about $f_n,g_n,h_n$ are proven
as in Proposition~\ref{prop.convfamily}.

For the converse, let $\alpha = f_0(0)$ and $\beta = g_0(0)$;
by hypothesis $\alpha$ and $\beta$ are invertible, and $h_0(0) = \alpha\beta$.
Define the ordinary generating functions
$F(x,t) = \sum_{n=0}^\infty f_n(x) \, t^n$,
$G(x,t) = \sum_{n=0}^\infty g_n(x) \, t^n$
and $H(x,t) = \sum_{n=0}^\infty h_n(x) \, t^n$;
they have constant terms $\alpha$, $\beta$ and $\alpha\beta$, respectively.
Then define $L(x,t) = \log [\alpha^{-1} F(x,t)]$,
$M(x,t) = \log [\beta^{-1} G(x,t)]$ and
$N(x,t) = \log [(\alpha\beta)^{-1} H(x,t)]$;
they have constant term 0.
The identity \reff{eq.conv.fgh}, translated to generating functions,
says that $F(x,t) \, G(y,t) = H(x+y,t)$,
or equivalently that $L(x,t) + M(y,t) = N(x+y,t)$.
Then we must have $[x^k] N(x,t) = 0$ for $k \ge 2$
in order to avoid terms $x^i y^j$ with $i,j \ge 1$ in $N(x+y,t)$.
It then follows that we must have
\begin{equation}
   L(x,t) \:=\: \Gamma(t) \,+\, x \Psi(t)  \:,\quad
   M(x,t) \:=\: \Delta(t) \,+\, x \Psi(t)  \:,\quad
   N(x,t) \:=\: \Gamma(t) \,+\, \Delta(t) \,+\, x \Psi(t)
\end{equation}
for some formal power series $\Gamma,\Delta,\Psi \in R[[t]]$,
where $\Gamma$ and $\Delta$ have zero constant term.
Then \reff{eq.prop.convfamily.bis} holds with
$A(t) = \alpha e^{\Gamma(t)}$ and $B(t) = \beta e^{\Delta(t)}$.
Furthermore, $L,M,N$ are uniquely determined by ${\bm{f}},{\bm{g}},{\bm{h}}$;
hence $\Gamma,\Delta,\Psi$ are also uniquely determined;
hence $A,B,\Psi$ are uniquely determined as well.
\hbox{\hskip 6pt\vrule width6pt height7pt depth1pt \hskip1pt}\bigskip

\bigskip

{\bf Remarks.}
1.  Under the assumption that $f_0(0)$ and $g_0(0)$ are invertible in $R$,
clearly ${\bm{f}} = {\bm{g}} = {\bm{h}}$ if and only if $A(t) = B(t) = 1$;
and in this case we recover the situation of Proposition~\ref{prop.convfamily}.

2.  If the only idempotents in $R$ are 0 and 1,
then it is not difficult to show that the same holds true in $R[[t]]$.
In this case ${\bm{f}} = {\bm{g}} = {\bm{h}}$ if and only if
$A(t) = B(t) = 1$ or $A(t) = B(t) = 0$;
and we also recover the situation of Proposition~\ref{prop.convfamily}.

3.  Note that here, unlike in Proposition~\ref{prop.convfamily},
it does not suffice to assume \reff{eq.conv.fgh} only for $x=y$.
Indeed, the equality
\begin{equation}
   \sum_{k=0}^n f_k(x) \, g_{n-k}(x)  \;=\;  h_n(2x)
\end{equation}
can be taken as the {\em definition}\/ of ${\bm{h}}$
for {\em completely arbitrary}\/ sequences ${\bm{f}}$ and ${\bm{g}}$.

4.  The foregoing theory can once again equivalently be expressed
in terms of the polynomials $F_n(x) = n! \, f_n(x)$
and likewise for $g_n$ and $h_n$, which satisfy
\begin{equation}
    \sum_{k=0}^n \binom{n}{k} F_k(x) \, G_{n-k}(y)  \;=\;  H_n(x+y)
    \;.
 \label{eq.FGHsum.binomial}
\end{equation}
Sequences of polynomials $F_n(x) = n! \, f_n(x)$
defined by \reff{eq.prop.convfamily.bis}
are called {\em Sheffer sequences}\/ \cite[pp.~2, 18--19]{Roman_84}.\footnote{
   As part of the definition of ``Sheffer sequence'',
   some authors (e.g.\ \cite[p.~2]{Roman_84})
   impose the additional conditions $A(0) \neq 0$,
   $B(0) = 0$, and $B'(0) \neq 0$.
   But these conditions are irrelevant for our purposes,
   so we refrain from imposing them.
}
Many classical sequences of polynomials ---
including the Hermite, Laguerre and Bernoulli polynomials ---
are Sheffer sequences \cite[pp.~2, 28--31, 53--130]{Roman_84}.
 $\blacksquare$ \bigskip

\bigskip

\noindent
{\bf Open question.}
What happens if $f_0(0)$ and/or $g_0(0)$ are not invertible?

\bigskip

\section*{4. Pascal-like matrices.}

We now turn to the matrix interpretation of the Chu--Vandermonde identity.
But before proceeding further,
let us generalize the identity \reff{eq.identity.L} in two ways:
First, we allow three different matrices $A,B,C$ in place of $L,L,L$;
and second, we do not require $A,B,C$ to be lower-triangular.

So let $A = (a_{ij})_{i,j \ge 0}$ be a matrix with entries
in a commutative ring $R$.  We define the {\em row-generating series}\/
$A_i(u) = \sum_{j=0}^\infty a_{ij} u^j \in R[[u]$.
Clearly, there is a one-to-one correspondence between matrices
$A = (a_{ij})_{i,j \ge 0}$ and collections $(A_i(u))_{i \ge 0}$
of row-generating series.

We then have the following result:

\begin{proposition}[Characterization of Pascal-like matrices]
   \label{prop.pascal-like}
Let $R$ be a commutative ring, and let $f,g,h \in R[[u]]$.
Then
\begin{equation}
   A_i(u) \;=\; f(u) \, h(u)^i   \:,\quad
   B_i(u) \;=\; g(u) \, h(u)^i   \:,\quad
   C_i(u) \;=\; f(u) \, g(u) \, h(u)^i
 \label{eq.ABC.fgh}
\end{equation}
are the row-generating series of matrices
$A = (a_{ij})_{i,j \ge 0}$,
$B = (b_{ij})_{i,j \ge 0}$,
$C = (c_{ij})_{i,j \ge 0}$
satisfying
\begin{equation}
   \sum_{j=0}^n a_{ij} \, b_{\ell,n-j}  \;=\;  c_{i+\ell,n}
   \qquad\hbox{for all $i,\ell,n \ge 0$}
   \;.
 \label{eq.identity.ABC}
\end{equation}

Conversely, suppose that
$A = (a_{ij})_{i,j \ge 0}$,
$B = (b_{ij})_{i,j \ge 0}$,
$C = (c_{ij})_{i,j \ge 0}$
are matrices with entries in a commutative ring $R$
that satisfy \reff{eq.identity.ABC}.
Suppose further that $a_{00}$ and $b_{00}$ are invertible in $R$
[or equivalently that $c_{00} = a_{00} b_{00}$ is invertible in $R$].
Then there exist unique series $f,g,h \in R[[u]]$
such that the row-generating series of $A,B,C$ are given by \reff{eq.ABC.fgh};
and $f$ and $g$ are invertible.
\end{proposition}

\par\medskip\noindent{\sc Proof.\ }
Multiplying \reff{eq.identity.ABC} by $u^n$ and summing over $n$,
we see that \reff{eq.identity.ABC} is equivalent to the equality
\begin{equation}
   A_i(u) \, B_\ell(u)  \;=\;  C_{i+\ell}(u)
   \qquad\hbox{for all $i,\ell \ge 0$}
 \label{eq.AiBl}
\end{equation}
for the row-generating series.
It is immediate that the construction \reff{eq.ABC.fgh}
satisfies \reff{eq.AiBl}.

For the converse, let us write out \reff{eq.AiBl} in detail:
\begin{subeqnarray}
   C_0  & = &  A_0 B_0  \\
   C_1  & = &  A_0 B_1  \;=\;  A_1 B_0  \\
   C_2  & = &  A_0 B_2  \;=\;  A_1 B_1  \;=\;  A_2 B_0  \\
        & \vdots &   \nonumber
\end{subeqnarray}
Since $a_{00}$ and $b_{00}$ are invertible in $R$,
it follows that $A_0$ and $B_0$ are invertible in $R[[u]]$.
From $C_n = A_0 B_n = A_n B_0$, we deduce that $A_n/A_0 = B_n/B_0$;
let us call this common value $h_n$.
Then \reff{eq.AiBl} says (after division by $A_0 B_0$) that
$h_i h_\ell = h_{i+\ell}$ for all $i,\ell$.
It follows by induction that $h_n = h_1^n$.
So \reff{eq.ABC.fgh} holds with $f = A_0$, $g = B_0$, $h = h_1$.
Moreover, it is clear from \reff{eq.ABC.fgh} that $f = A_0$ and $g = B_0$;
and since $A_0$ and $B_0$ are invertible, we must also have $h = A_1/A_0$.
So $f,g,h$ are uniquely determined.
\hbox{\hskip 6pt\vrule width6pt height7pt depth1pt \hskip1pt}\bigskip

\bigskip

\noindent
{\bf Open question.}
What happens if $a_{00}$ and/or $b_{00}$ are not invertible?

\bigskip
\bigskip

{\bf Remarks.}
1.  Under the assumption that $a_{00}$ and $b_{00}$ are invertible in $R$,
clearly $A=B=C$ if and only if $f(u) = g(u) = 1$.
It turns out (as I discovered after completing
the proof of Proposition~\ref{prop.pascal-like})
that the $A=B=C$ special case of Proposition~\ref{prop.pascal-like}
had been proven nearly 40 years ago
by Olive \cite[Theorems~3.2 and 3.3]{Olive_79}.

2.  If $f(t)$ and $h(t)$ are formal power series,
let ${\mathcal{R}}(f,h)$ be the infinite matrix
$({\mathcal{R}}(f,h)_{nk})_{n,k \ge 0}$ defined by
\begin{equation}
   {\mathcal{R}}(f,h)_{nk}
   \;=\;
   [t^n] \, f(t) h(t)^k
   \;.
 \label{def.riordan}
\end{equation}
When $h$ has constant term 0, the matrix ${\mathcal{R}}(f,h)$ is lower-triangular
and is called a {\em Riordan array}\/ \cite{Shapiro_91,Sprugnoli_94,Barry_16};
such matrices arise frequently in enumerative combinatorics,
and the theory of Riordan arrays provides a useful unifying framework.
But --- as a handful of authors have noted
\cite{Bala_15} \cite{Hoggatt_75} \cite[p.~288]{Pemantle_13} ---
there are also interesting examples
in which $h$ has a nonzero constant term.
Let us call this more general concept,
in which $h$ is an arbitrary formal power series,
a {\em wide-sense Riordan array}\/.\footnote{
   References \cite{Pemantle_13,Bala_15}
   call this a ``generalized Riordan array'',
   but we prefer to avoid this term because it has already been used,
   in a highly-cited paper \cite{Wang_08},
   for a completely unrelated generalization of Riordan arrays.
}
We can then see that the matrices $A,B,C$ defined in \reff{eq.ABC.fgh}
are simply the transpose of a wide-sense Riordan array.

3. What is the relation between Propositions~\ref{prop.convfamily.bis}
and \ref{prop.pascal-like}?
Comparing \reff{eq.conv.fgh} with \reff{eq.identity.ABC},
we see that $x,y,k$ correspond to $i,\ell,j$, respectively;
and then, comparing \reff{eq.prop.convfamily.bis} with \reff{eq.ABC.fgh},
we see that $A(t), B(t), e^{\Psi(t)}$
correspond to $f(u), g(u), h(u)$, respectively.
Therefore, if $\Psi(0) = 0$, we can define $h = e^\Psi$ satisfying $h(0) = 1$;
and since in this case the $f_n,g_n,h_n$ are {\em polynomials}\/,
it makes sense to evaluate them at integer arguments
to obtain $f_n(i) = a_{in}$ and analogously for $g$ and $h$.
And conversely, if $h(0) = 1$,
we can define $\Psi = \log h$ satisfying $\Psi(0) = 0$,
and a triplet of matrices $A,B,C$ satisfying \reff{eq.ABC.fgh}
can be extended to a triplet ${\bm{f}},{\bm{g}},{\bm{h}}$
of sequences of polynomials satisfying \reff{eq.prop.convfamily.bis};
once again we can evaluate them at integer arguments
to obtain $f_n(i) = a_{in}$ and analogously for $g$ and $h$.
In other words, when $h(0) = 1$, each column of the matrices $A,B,C$
is a {\em polynomial}\/ function of the index $i$.

If, by contrast, $\Psi(0) \stackrel{\rm def}{=} \psi_0 \neq 0$ or $h(0) \neq 1$,
then Propositions~\ref{prop.convfamily.bis} and \ref{prop.pascal-like}
are incommensurable for general commutative rings $R$.
However, when $R = {\mathbb R}$ or ${\mathbb C}$, we can still define $h = e^\Psi$
satisfying $h(0) = e^{\psi_0}$;
then $f_n(x),g_n(x),h_n(x)$ are polynomials multiplied by $e^{\psi_0 x}$
and can again be evaluated at integer arguments.
And conversely, if $R= {\mathbb R}$ (resp.\ ${\mathbb C}$) and $h(0) > 0$ (resp.\ $h(0) \neq 0$),
then we can define $\Psi = \log h$,
and the columns of $A,B,C$ are interpolated by functions
$f_n(x), g_n(x), h_n(x)$ that are polynomials multiplied by $e^{\psi_0 x}$.
 $\blacksquare$ \bigskip

\bigskip

We can now specialize to the case in which $A$ and $B$ are lower-triangular.
In fact, we can be a bit more general.
Let us say that a matrix $M = (m_{ij})_{i,j \ge 0}$
is {\em lower-triangular in row $i$}\/ if $m_{ij} = 0$ for all $j > i$.
We then have:

\begin{corollary}
   \label{cor.pascal-like}
Let
$A = (a_{ij})_{i,j \ge 0}$,
$B = (b_{ij})_{i,j \ge 0}$,
$C = (c_{ij})_{i,j \ge 0}$
be matrices with entries in a commutative ring $R$
that satisfy \reff{eq.identity.ABC};
and suppose further that $a_{00}$ and $b_{00}$ are invertible in $R$.
If $A$ and $B$ are lower-triangular in row 0,
then there exist $\alpha,\beta \in R$ with $\alpha$ and $\beta$ invertible,
and $h \in R[[u]]$, such that
\begin{equation}
   A_i(u) \;=\; \alpha \, h(u)^i   \:,\quad
   B_i(u) \;=\; \beta \, h(u)^i   \:,\quad
   C_i(u) \;=\; \alpha\beta \, h(u)^i
   \;.
\end{equation}
If, in addition, at least one of $A,B,C$ is lower-triangular in row 1,
then there exist $\alpha,\beta,\kappa,\lambda \in R$,
with $\alpha$ and $\beta$ invertible, such that
\begin{equation}
   a_{ij}  \;=\;  \alpha \kappa^{i-j} \lambda^j \binom{i}{j}  \:,\quad
   b_{ij}  \;=\;  \beta \kappa^{i-j} \lambda^j \binom{i}{j}  \:,\quad
   c_{ij}  \;=\;  \alpha\beta \kappa^{i-j} \lambda^j \binom{i}{j}
   \;.
\end{equation}
\end{corollary}

\par\medskip\noindent{\sc Proof.\ }
If $A$ and $B$ are lower-triangular in row 0,
then $f = a_{00} = \alpha$ and $g = b_{00} = \beta$.
If, in addition, at least one of $A,B,C$ is lower-triangular in row 1,
then $h = \kappa + \lambda u$.
\hbox{\hskip 6pt\vrule width6pt height7pt depth1pt \hskip1pt}\bigskip

When $A=B=C$, this yields:

\begin{corollary}[No-go theorem for lower-triangular Pascal-like matrices]
   \label{cor.pascal-like.2}
Let $L = (L_{ij})_{i,j \ge 0}$ be a lower-triangular matrix
with entries in a commutative ring $R$
that satisfies \reff{eq.identity.L}.
If $L_{00}$ is invertible in $R$, then in fact $L_{00} = 1$,
and there exist $\kappa,\lambda \in R$ such that
\begin{equation}
   L_{ij}  \;=\;  \kappa^{i-j} \lambda^j \binom{i}{j}
   \;.
\end{equation}
\end{corollary}

Corollary~\ref{cor.pascal-like.2} thus gives a negative answer
to the question posed in the introduction:
there are no lower-triangular solutions to \reff{eq.identity.L}
other than trivial rescalings of the Pascal matrix.
But --- and this is the interesting twist ---
Proposition~\ref{prop.pascal-like} shows that there {\em are}\/
interesting examples if we give up the insistence that $L$ be lower-triangular:
we can take $f(u) = g(u) = 1$
and choose an {\em arbitrary}\/ formal power series $h(u)$,
not just $h(u) = \kappa + \lambda u$.
These examples turn out to have interesting applications
to the theory of Hankel-total positivity \cite{Sokal_totalpos};
but that story will have to be told elsewhere \cite{Petreolle-Sokal_nontri}.

\section*{Acknowledgments}

I wish to thank Mathias P\'etr\'eolle and Bao-Xuan Zhu
for helpful conversations,
and the referees for helpful suggestions.

This research was supported in part by
U.K.~Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council grant EP/N025636/1.

Combinatorics (math.CO); Commutative Algebra (math.AC)